# ABC is Political



## Garpal Gumnut (7 December 2011)

I was stopped at a State/Federal Roadblock today with about 10 workers on a major highway, and was forced to listen to ABC Radio National Rural Report.

I expected to be regaled with low prices, lack of rain, etc. etc. but instead suffered 18 minutes of bloody global warming claptrap.

Do not these jokers realise the tide has turned against soft left/green propaganda.

I pity a farmer on his tractor or bike, having to listen to this rubbish.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2011)

Your spot on there GG. I was watching ABC 24 a few weeks back and it was amazing how pro anyone but the Libs, they were.
Will be interesting how that works out for them if the Libs win the next election.
What do they say about $#!ting in your own nest or burning bridges you may have to cross over. LOL LOL LOL.
It is unbelievable that these people call themselves reporters and even the lay person can see their bias. 
How dumb is that if your job is to report, you don't want to allienate half the audience with your bias. Thats half your audience gone as well as your future bosses.


----------



## medicowallet (8 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I was stopped at a State/Federal Roadblock today with about 10 workers on a major highway, and was forced to listen to ABC Radio National Rural Report.
> 
> I expected to be regaled with low prices, lack of rain, etc. etc. but instead suffered 18 minutes of bloody global warming claptrap.
> 
> ...




Farmers are being won over by the prospect of carbon into soil refunds.

This govt has lost its way.. we have industries here closing, and they are making us less competitive with this stupid tax. BTW I was listening to the same thing, and during the day, the car manufacturers gave their massive hint for extra compensation or downsizing or leaving the country.

More examples of mismanagement, sold under the proposition of saving the world, advertised by the national carrier, paid for by the people who will be slugged by the tax.

I hope the next 2 years fly.


----------



## macca (8 December 2011)

There was a time about 20 or 30 years ago that I used to listen to the ABC for the news. It was actually "the news" unbiased with a broad spectrum of events, easily the best news service in Australia.

Now we get a very biased bulletin with free ads for Greens, Labor and bleeding hearts masquerading as a news service. The frightening thing is that they have just been given an open ended contract to broadcast this rubbish to Asia as Radio Australia.

I have read a couple of books written by ex ABC journos who were posted overseas. Both commented on the fact that other countries quite simply don't care about Australia, we are rarely mentioned in any broadcast over there.

They also commented that when the ABC reports that Australia has offended some other nation, there has been no mention of the alleged offense within that nation.

Funny how the ABC/lefty type people just think they are Soooo important, when in reality the only people taking them seriously are themselves. Everyone else is just getting on with life.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 December 2011)

The ABC is now on-publishing articles from the Monthly, a magazine read exclusively by the academic left and inner city basketweavers.



> How can climate change denialism be explained?
> 399 Comments
> 
> ROBERT MANNE
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3722126.html

It would appear this new partnership is based on ideological synergy between left wing magazines of low circulation such as the Monthly and the ABC, a left controlled national broadcaster.

In fairness it would be good to see the ABC's left producers and management publish some articles in the Drum arguing the other side of the climate change hoax, from legitimate widely read sources such as for example Quadrant, or the Australian.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (9 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The ABC is now on-publishing articles from the Monthly, a magazine read exclusively by the academic left and inner city basketweavers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Actually GG it would be great if any of the channels would put on an unbiased debate with the best from both sides.
I get so sick of hearing from the pro and anti being interviewed by the mentally dormant.
Who are just pleased to get to talk to someone or anyone, who will give them an interview opportunity.
T.v interviewing is a bit like watching " Australia hasn't got talent" . The problems are the presenters push their bias, therefore they only get interviews with guests who they are sympathetic to.
If they have an interview with someone they dissagree with, they interupt and don't allow them to have their say.
Just ends up as crap T.V


----------



## Julia (9 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The ABC is now on-publishing articles from the Monthly, a magazine read exclusively by the academic left and inner city basketweavers.
> 
> It would appear this new partnership is based on ideological synergy between left wing magazines of low circulation such as the Monthly and the ABC, a left controlled national broadcaster.
> 
> ...



I hope you're not holding your breath for the above.

The latest government move in terms of broadcasting has been with the dumping of any legitimate tender process for the Australia Network on the trumped up excuse of 'leaks', and the consequent awarding to the ABC of this prize, indefinitely.

This is Conroy's decision.  Of course he would do this.  In so doing he ensures that what goes from Australia to overseas reflects favourably the government's position.
The strong contender was Sky in which a very small stake is held by News Ltd.
God forbid that any such entity should have the slightest say in what Australia presents to the world.

gg, if you think the Country Hour is biased, have a listen to (a) The Science Show with Robin Williams, or (b) Late Night Live with Phillip Adams.  Both on Radio National.
How Radio National in particular can claim to be 'balanced' is just a joke.


----------



## sails (9 December 2011)

Same sort of issues in the UK's BBC:



> The BBC is charged with failing to report on global warming with fairness, accuracy or even the most basic scepticism that is essential to good journalism:
> 
> Written by Christopher Booker, one of the UK’s most seasoned journalists, the report critically reviews the BBC’s coverage of climate change issues against its statutory obligation to report ‘with due accuracy and impartiality’.
> 
> His report, The BBC and Climate Change: A Triple Betrayal, shows that the BBC has not only failed in its professional duty to report fully and accurately: it has betrayed its own principles, in three respects:...​





Read more: Not reporting, but propagandising


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 December 2011)

Julia said:


> I hope you're not holding your breath for the above.
> 
> The latest government move in terms of broadcasting has been with the dumping of any legitimate tender process for the Australia Network on the trumped up excuse of 'leaks', and the consequent awarding to the ABC of this prize, indefinitely.
> 
> ...




Yes I know Robin.

He is a sad sack who has been playing the same tune for many years. He is not the brightest star in the firmament but is powerfully connected with a small coterie of faux scientists. I doubt if his powerful place in the politically correct firmament of Showbiz Science will be assailed this side of a heart attack. He is an impressive networker and has the ABC in thrall. He would not last two weeks on Sky or even on the Discovery Channel. A Jacque Cousteau he is not.

I have supped with Phillip Adams, and he is quite a nice guy, and outside of his studio is quite an agreeable fellow. I fear his mum may have dropped him on his head as an infant as he hates the beliefs of his antecedents.

gg


----------



## bellenuit (10 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have supped with Phillip Adams, and he is quite a nice guy, and outside of his studio is quite an agreeable fellow. I fear his mum may have dropped him on his head as an infant as he hates the beliefs of his antecedents.




The wife follows him religiously, but I can't stand the guy. Just a Labor hack. Didn't Hawke give him some role some years ago - Minister for the Future, I think. I don't know if it was just an honorary or fully functional role. The way he introduces a discussion is so biased. If it is about a conservative person, he will have poisoned the listeners' minds before the person is discussed. Left wing opinion on issues is taken as a given fact and the discussion builds from there.

Some paper suggested he was a "national treasure" at one stage. Heaven help us.

I have given up reading his articles on the Weekend Australian. I just scan the article and if it contains the words Howard, religion or anything sacred to the conservative cause, I know it will be just a repeat of the same old drivel.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 December 2011)

bellenuit said:


> The wife follows him religiously, but I can't stand the guy. Just a Labor hack. Didn't Hawke give him some role some years ago - Minister for the Future, I think. I don't know if it was just an honorary or fully functional role. The way he introduces a discussion is so biased. If it is about a conservative person, he will have poisoned the listeners' minds before the person is discussed. Left wing opinion on issues is taken as a given fact and the discussion builds from there.
> 
> Some paper suggested he was a "national treasure" at one stage. Heaven help us.
> 
> I have given up reading his articles on the Weekend Australian. I just scan the article and if it contains the words Howard, religion or anything sacred to the conservative cause, I know it will be just a repeat of the same old drivel.




Phillip Adams is actually quite different in real life. He is an old trouper from movies and I suspect he secretly hates his persona.

And he doesn't breathe as heavily at dinner as he does on LNL. So I suspect he just does it because he's been doing it for so many years.

Many of his guests on LNL are faded lefties from the USA, Canada and the UK who cannot get airtime at home.

His latest joke is to support Kevin Rudd. He does like taking the piss.

Very prescient comments bellenuit.

gg


----------



## Eager (11 December 2011)

I have always noticed that the ABC has a bias to the left. I don't normally watch its news or listen to it proper (I prefer Dribble J for the music content, its championing of local music talent and Dr Karl, but not for it's bent on news) but have occasionally listened in to its local (I live in a regional area) talkback radio.

Mention was made at the top of the thread of the poor cow cockies having to put up with listening to supposed climate change claptrap. What about the poor listeners putting up with silly cow cockies ringing in about the same subject? Recently, one had his 2 minutes of fame by blaming global warming on...gravity! "All the carbon that has been put in the air by the factories in town? Well, what comes up, must come down! Gravity is bringing the carbon back to earth, it used to just stay in the sky but now it's coming down which is why the climate is changing now, and since we can't change gravity, we just have to put up with it! The Carbon Tax won't reverse gravity!!!!"

I think he hadn't been into town for a long, long time.


----------



## Logique (12 December 2011)

About the only bearable ABC radio experience is the Classic FM station, but don't forget to mute the sound during the news bulletins. Radio JJJ do have their moments, give them their due, they will support local musicians.

The local ABC radio stations are good during natural disasters (flood/bushfire etc) when they temporarily climb down off the usual green/gay/sisterhood soapbox, and actually respond to the needs of local communities.


----------



## Julia (12 December 2011)

Logique said:


> About the only bearable ABC radio experience is the Classic FM station, but don't forget to mute the sound during the news bulletins. Radio JJJ do have their moments, give them their due, they will support local musicians.
> 
> The local ABC radio stations are good during natural disasters (flood/bushfire etc) when they temporarily climb down off the usual green/gay/sisterhood soapbox, and actually respond to the needs of local communities.



Well, I find quite a few programs that I really enjoy:  Radio National - "The Book Show "(some great interviews with writers/book reviews etc.);  "The Philosophers' Zone",
"All in the Mind", "Sunday Profile" to name a few.

And on the Local Radio network the Qld "Evenings with Steve Austin" is usually able to offer more interesting fare than that on television.

But you do need to avoid "Bush Telegraph", "The Science Show", "The Country Hour" and Phillip Adams unless you want to be bashed over the head by 'climate change' every second sentence.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (12 December 2011)

Julia said:


> Well, I find quite a few programs that I really enjoy:  Radio National - "The Book Show "(some great interviews with writers/book reviews etc.);  "The Philosophers' Zone",
> "All in the Mind", "Sunday Profile" to name a few.
> 
> And on the Local Radio network the Qld "Evenings with Steve Austin" is usually able to offer more interesting fare than that on television.
> ...




Thanks Julia,

That is a good summary of the best and worst on Radio ABC.

I do enjoy Counterpoint and Garrison Keillors Radio Show as well.

As I said, if you listen to the undercurrent of Phil Adams he is a hoot. He has a show and he plays to it.

For example he adores Kevin Rudd, and would love him back as PM. Our 8c a day. And those Pommy and Canuck darlings who cannot get on their own shows who get up at ungodly hours to amuse us. One night I swear one was more cut than a godbotherer in Manila of an Easter.

gg


----------



## Julia (12 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I do enjoy Counterpoint and Garrison Keillors Radio Show as well.



Goodness, how could I have omitted Counterpoint with the delicious satirist, Patrick Cooke.


----------



## robusta (12 December 2011)

ABC is Political, News Ltd is Political, 2GB is Political, Fairfax is Political, Nine Entertainement is Political, Ten Network is Political.... 

Thank god I need someone to make my mind up for me :


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 December 2011)

robusta said:


> ABC is Political, News Ltd is Political, 2GB is Political, Fairfax is Political, Nine Entertainement is Political, Ten Network is Political....
> 
> Thank god I need someone to make my mind up for me :




The ABC is so political that the Drum, a site of comment on the ABC has not got one mention of the Queensland Health debacle.

This is what it is headlining.

Julia Gillard's stoush with Rudd
Durban Global Warming, a good result
Oznet given to ABC not Sky, the reasons why.
The perceived evils of Tony Abbott through leftie lens.
The American Elections
What makes Journalists tick
Marriage traditions forever evolving.
Julia Gillards stoush with Rudd again.
The luck of the Australian people to have Shorten, Roxon, Combet & Plibersek promoted.


Gimme a break.

gg


----------



## Logique (13 December 2011)

I omitted the rider 'for continuous listening' when praising ABC Classic FM - mornings presenter Emma Ayres is a hoot, just outstanding, and a classically trained musician herself. 

Selected ABC shows - I would agree, plenty of them. RN has Lucky Oceans with The Daily Planet, and there's Weekend Planet with Doug Spencer, these guys know their music. And Music Deli another one. 

And of course the ABC's version of 'balance' - Counterpoint on Monday afternoons. Great show.


----------



## Knobby22 (13 December 2011)

I really like Hindsight when I can catch it.


----------



## Calliope (13 December 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As I said, if you listen to the undercurrent of Phil Adams he is a hoot. He has a show and he plays to it.
> For example he adores Kevin Rudd, and would love him back as PM.




All the piss went out of Adams with the demise of John Howard. Adams proudly boasted that he was the country's leading Howard hater. He has been suffering from withdrawal symptoms ever since. He has transferred some of his hate to Julia for what she did to Kevin, whom he loves. But it lacks the real vitriol he had for Howard.

 Its strange that he loves Rudd. It has been said that anyone who likes Rudd doesn't really know him.  

Another of his great hates was Thatcher.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 December 2011)

Calliope said:


> All the piss went out of Adams with the demise of John Howard. Adams proudly boasted that he was the country's leading Howard hater. He has been suffering from withdrawal symptoms ever since. He has transferred some of his hate to Julia for what she did to Kevin, whom he loves. But it lacks the real vitriol he had for Howard.
> 
> Its strange that he loves Rudd. It has been said that anyone who likes Rudd doesn't really know him.
> 
> Another of his great hates was Thatcher.




As I said above, Phil Adams is quite a nice bloke in the flesh. He is nowhere near as radical as he portrays, and I guess with his movie background it is 90% Image and 10% Conviction.

He has an impressive Property portfolio.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 January 2012)

The behaviour of ABC news in reporting untruths about Tony Abbott and the Tent Embassy should be investigated.

I distinctly heard broadcast on the 7pm news on Australia Day that the Aboriginal activists were enraged by Tony Abbott's statement that he wanted to get rid of the Tent Embassy.

Any reading of Abbott's statement on Sky News earlier in the day would have made any journalist ashamed to pen that ABC News report.

I would be grateful for a transcript of that broadcast, if any ASF members have a link to it, as I have a mind to make a complaint about it. 

gg


----------



## macca (28 January 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The behaviour of ABC news in reporting untruths about Tony Abbott and the Tent Embassy should be investigated.
> 
> I distinctly heard broadcast on the 7pm news on Australia Day that the Aboriginal activists were enraged by Tony Abbott's statement that he wanted to get rid of the Tent Embassy.
> 
> ...




He reckons he said



Mr Abbott said: "I think the indigenous people of Australia can be very proud of the respect in which they are held by every Australian and, yes, I think a lot has changed since then and I think it probably is time to move on from that."

The protesters had misinterpreted those comments, Mr Anderson said.

Can't find an actual transcript yet


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 January 2012)

macca said:


> here you go GG
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...embassy-comments/story-e6frfku0-1226255166465





Thanks macca,

I was after the actual transcript of the ABC 7pm News broadcast of ABC 1 TV on Australia Day. 

gg


----------



## macca (28 January 2012)

macca said:


> He reckons he said
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Her you are GG, full copy  Go get em mate !

http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/Latest...articleId/8541/Doorstop-Interview-Sydney.aspx


----------



## Knobby22 (28 January 2012)

ABC mentioned the Chinese year of the dragon and then showed Julie Gillard!

I think generally they are pretty fair but not always.


----------



## Calliope (28 January 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Thanks macca,
> 
> I was after the actual transcript of the ABC 7pm News broadcast of ABC 1 TV on Australia Day.
> 
> gg




I can't find a transcript of that broadcast GG, but they were still  deliberately repeating the lie next day, viz;

" ...they were angered by comments made by Tony Abbott that it was time for the tent embassy to be taken down." 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-27/im-fine-gillard-after-security-scare/3795806


----------



## Knobby22 (6 February 2012)

Calliope, GG and others

It was on Media Watch tonight.  (Watch it on iview). Much of which is *who told the Abbott lies.*
The first to say that Abbott said to pull down the tents was *2UE.*
They blamed *AAP *who posted 7 minutes later. It was AAP who said that Abbott said the stuff that was spread on most of the networks. 

AAP apologised on Media Watch and said they didn't do it for political reasons. I think compared to the other news services that the ABC were a lot less complicit.  Also watch it to see Newscorp do some other nasty stuff to an aboriginal man(not really news).


----------



## drsmith (6 February 2012)

Calliope said:


> I can't find a transcript of that broadcast GG, but they were still  deliberately repeating the lie next day, viz;
> 
> " ...they were angered by comments made by Tony Abbott that it was time for the tent embassy to be taken down."
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-27/im-fine-gillard-after-security-scare/3795806



The exact words from the above ABC news clip were,



> " ...they were angered by *comments Mr Abbott made suggesting it was time for the tent embassy to be taken down*."



Sloppy journalism at best.

Perhaps the ABC should analyse itself on Media Watch and apologise to its viewers.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 February 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Calliope, GG and others
> 
> It was on Media Watch tonight.  (Watch it on iview). Much of which is *who told the Abbott lies.*
> The first to say that Abbott said to pull down the tents was *2UE.*
> ...




Thanks mate, 

I'm in beautiful Burketown tonight and according to my schedule it starts in 3 minutes for regional ABC.

I best best get some diesel in to the gennie, as I was going to bed before your post.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 February 2012)

drsmith said:


> The exact words from the above ABC news clip were,
> 
> 
> Sloppy journalism at best.
> ...




I'd agree doc,

Media Watch was reasonable tonight except they let ABC 7pm News off the hook. It was they who transmitted the lie about Tony Abbott's comments 11 hours after they were uttered.

Another ABC coverup, but a good program nonetheless. 

I usually watch Sky now, it's the first ABC I've watched for a while.

gg


----------



## drsmith (6 February 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I'd agree doc,
> 
> Media Watch was reasonable tonight except they let ABC 7pm News off the hook. It was they who transmitted the lie about Tony Abbott's comments 11 hours after they were uttered.



It's worse than that.  The video link above is from ABC News Breakfast the following day.

It will be interesting to see if Andrew Bolt puts Media Watch, and, by extension, the ABC under the microscope on this.


----------



## Eager (7 February 2012)

What are peoples opinions of Q & A?

It always seems to me that in an effort to provide a balanced panel, there is often an element of tokenism.

I do not like the way that the host often seems to interrupt and talk down to a coalition MP but lets nitwits like Greer run amok and pull faces.

Last nights show, the first of the season, did seem totally neutral though on balance. There will always be arguments between opposing MP's but the only difference I noticed is that Hockey sweated under the studio light and Wong didn't.


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2012)

The ABC botched the math with this piece on the 7:30 Report tonight, and more.



> CHRIS UHLMANN: Brett Matthew's $19,000 bill is a $3,500 increase on one he got just six months ago for the same level of usage. At $1,800, *carbon tax makes up just under 10 per cent of the rise.* His story is one of a procession through Parliament as rising power prices and the politics of carbon collide.




It's actually 10% of the bill and *over 50% of the rise*.



> JOURNALIST (March 24, 2011): Electricity prices have risen quite a lot over the last few years without a carbon price. Do you think those rises have been reasonable?
> 
> TONY ABBOTT, OPPOSITION LEADER: I think that at least some of those rises have been due to the state Labor government's failure to invest and the state Labor government's gouging usurious dividends from the utilities. Effectively, they've imposed a tax on the utilities.
> 
> ...




With that statement as quoted by the ABC, he hasn't repudiated what he said previously, he's just stated a simple fact.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3569651.htm


----------



## DB008 (16 August 2012)

Can we also add the Channel 10 program, 'The Project'. It's a left wing P.O.S. program. l refuse to watch it anymore.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 August 2012)

DB008 said:


> Can we also add the Channel 10 program, 'The Project'. It's a left wing P.O.S. program. l refuse to watch it anymore.




I don't watch it because its just stupid.


----------



## drsmith (16 August 2012)

10 is at least not funded by the taxpayer.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2012)

[http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-17/cassidy-a-rare-challenge-for-abbott/4203120

Even if Barry Cassidy is right, does he apply the same standard to the exact words from Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan about the introduction of a carbon tax during the 2010 election campaign ?


----------



## Julia (17 August 2012)

Imo Barrie Cassidy is making a very valid point.  Tony Abbott's continuous exaggeration and misrepresentation will eventually be his undoing.

This, from the article:


> When Jon Faine interviewed Tony Abbott on ABC's 774 on Tuesday, something unusual happened.
> 
> The Opposition Leader's careless use of words was actually challenged.
> 
> ...




Then, according to Barrie Cassidy, Mr Abbott went on to again make the completely incorrect statement about "illegal arrivals" later that same day.

John Howard would never have behaved like this.  Neither would he have encouraged/allowed members of his team to engage in the overkill of a whole day of gloating toward the government when the findings of the expert panel were revealed.

Sometimes less is more, Mr Abbott.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2012)

> Then, according to Barrie Cassidy, Mr Abbott went on to again make the completely incorrect statement about "illegal arrivals" later that same day.



What about when those arrivals pay people smugglers large sums of money to jump the queue ?

What about when the captain of a commercial vessel feels threatened by the asylum seekers he has rescued such that he has to alter course to a new destination ?

This is greyer than Barry Cassidy portrays.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2012)

Julia said:


> John Howard would never have behaved like this.  Neither would he have encouraged/allowed members of his team to engage in the overkill of a whole day of gloating toward the government when the findings of the expert panel were revealed.



My goodness dear lady.

The Coalition's responses to this are a side show in comparison to what Labor do to their own, let alone any body else.

I'm also trying to imagine how Paul Keating would have responded in similar circumstanses. It would have been worth it to see him as opposition leader to a government as incompetent as this one for the fireworks alone..........................................



almost.


----------



## sptrawler (17 August 2012)

Julia said:


> Imo Barrie Cassidy is making a very valid point.  Tony Abbott's continuous exaggeration and misrepresentation will eventually be his undoing.
> 
> This, from the article:
> 
> ...




Who knows when less is more? 
The polls will show, untill then it is our personal perceptions. 
I agree it may be a case of 'over the top' positive reinforcement, however Gillard adopts the same methodology.
It must be flavour of the month from the spin kings. It all probably originates from online surveys conducted in conjunction with so you think you can trance.
I am a firm believer that middle Australia has already voted, the ABC should start and think about its own ar$e.
It would be terrible to see the ABC lose government support due to a percieved bias, after the election.
There is nothing worse than seing those dishing out crap, standing with placards in their hands saying "save our jobs".
This is where it is so important that news should be news not personal views.


----------



## Julia (18 August 2012)

drsmith said:


> My goodness dear lady.
> 
> The Coalition's responses to this are a side show in comparison to what Labor do to their own, let alone any body else.
> 
> ...



No doubt entirely true.
I just preferred John Howard's more dignified, restrained style.



sptrawler said:


> Who knows when less is more?
> The polls will show, untill then it is our personal perceptions.
> I agree it may be a case of 'over the top' positive reinforcement, however Gillard adopts the same methodology.
> It must be flavour of the month from the spin kings. It all probably originates from online surveys conducted in conjunction with so you think you can trance.
> ...



I think we've given up on news being truly impartial.  
Agree with your comments.  It's just an indication of how low both sides have stooped.
The notion of holding any politician in a position of respect is laughable, and that's the great shame of it all.


----------



## moXJO (19 August 2012)

Just watched an interview with Julian Assange mother. She really started to get stuck in to the current labor goverment and in particular resident slimeball Nicola Roxon and the measures she went to with wiki leaks supporters when the abc interviewer interjected with:
"sorry that's all we have time for"
before anymore ranting could be done


----------



## drsmith (19 August 2012)

Julia said:


> I just preferred John Howard's more dignified, restrained style.



Yes, it was much better than the leaders of our major parties currently offer.


----------



## banco (19 August 2012)

Julia said:


> No doubt entirely true.
> I just preferred John Howard's more dignified, restrained style.




He's was able to manage that by having other people do his dirty work (including Tony Abbott).  He'd stand above the fray while his surrogates got their hands dirty.


----------



## So_Cynical (19 August 2012)

banco said:


> He's was able to manage that by having other people do his dirty work (including Tony Abbott).  He'd stand above the fray while his surrogates got their hands dirty.




Peter Reith comes to mind


----------



## banco (19 August 2012)

Yes I remember a few political writers at the time saying that a mark of Turnbull's political amateurism was that he got so publicly involved in the Godwin Gresch affair and that Howard would never have made that mistake.  Pushing it would have been outsourced to a backbencher.


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2012)

Well all that will pale into insignificance if the Thomson, Gillard endemic union rorting comes to the fore.
It would make work choices look like childs play.LOL


----------



## drsmith (19 August 2012)

sptrawler said:


> Well all that will pale into insignificance if the Thomson, Gillard endemic union rorting comes to the fore.
> It would make work choices look like childs play.LOL



Labor when it puts its mind to something makes any effort by anyone else look like childs play.

It's a tragedy their current idiology is not aligned with the best interest of our country.


----------



## sails (29 August 2012)

This is a pretty good example of the bias of ABC - only one mention of Gillard trying to turn a negative into a positive and the rest (all negative) on Abbott.  

How do they get away with such blatant bias when the majority of taxpayers are upset with this government and taxpayers pay for the ABC?  Surely they should be more impartial than this and, better still, respect the wishes of the majority.

Excerpt:



> Reader Peter has gone to Insiders’ website and collected all the segment descriptors which refer to either Abbott or Gillard for this graph of the AbbottAbbottAbbott phenomenon -Abbott mentions to the left, Gillard to the right



: 








The ABC’s AbbottAbbottAbbott Show



> That, friends, from the allegedly impartial and taxpayer-funded ABC, is absolutely astonishing.


----------



## Miss Hale (29 August 2012)

I have persisted with Insiders as I used to enjoy it but since the government has changed the show has changed.  They used to get stuck into the Howard governement no holes barred, but now they seem much softer on the Gillard government.  That coupled with the fact that they rarely have on any right leaning commentators anymore (I guess they liked heckling them when the Coalition was in power, not so much fun to have them on the show when Labor are in government) means it's hardly worth watching.


----------



## Julia (29 August 2012)

Agree that the Left bias on Insiders is very obvious.  It used to be a 'must watch' for me, but not now.
Especially when the odious David Marr is on.


----------



## dutchie (29 August 2012)

Julia said:


> Agree that the Left bias on Insiders is very obvious.  It used to be a 'must watch' for me, but not now.
> Especially when the odious David Marr is on.




+1


----------



## drsmith (29 August 2012)

When did Insiders last have Niki Savva on ?

It seems not for a while but I don't watch it every week.

She's been quiet on The Australian as well. Nothing for over 2 months.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/columnists/niki-savva


----------



## drsmith (29 August 2012)

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3578963.htm



> CHRIS UHLMANN: So, three years from now, Australia's carbon price, now locked at $23 a tonne, will float and be set in the European marketplace to rise as high or fall as low as the market wills. This is widely seen as a good thing.



No Chris, it's not fixed at $23 a tonne. It rises each year at CPI + 2,5% until it floats in 2015. 



> The fixed price The carbon price will start at $23.00 per tonne in 2012-13 and will be $24.15 in 2013-14 and $25.40 in 2014-15. The prices in the second and third year reflect a 2.5 per cent rise in real terms allowing for 2.5 per cent inflation per year (the midpoint of the Reserve Bank of Australia’s target range).




http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/securing-a-clean-energy-future/appendices/


----------



## sptrawler (29 August 2012)

drsmith said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3578963.htm
> 
> 
> No Chris, it's not fixed at $23 a tonne. It rises each year at CPI + 2,5% until it floats in 2015.
> ...




Snake oil salesmen, bloody terrible.
Same as we are going to change the dental scheme, which is a scam we have been running for the last five years. Absolute wan#ers.


----------



## dutchie (15 September 2012)

Greg Sheridan on the ABC bias (and Tony Abbott non incident)

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/newsradio/audio/20120914-sheridan.mp3


----------



## Calliope (16 September 2012)

Had to turn off Insiders this morning; compere, guest and panel 100% to the left. Perhaps Insiders is part of the Labor's dirt unit, "Get Abbott" campaign.


----------



## Macquack (16 September 2012)

Anyone who disagrees with Calliope is a "lefty".

Very simplistic approach.

What does that make you, apart from the obvious?


----------



## sails (16 September 2012)

Macquack said:


> Anyone who disagrees with Calliope is a "lefty".
> 
> Very simplistic approach.
> 
> What does that make you, apart from the obvious?





Where did he say that?

Your posts indicate that you support this bizarre labor government - why wouldn't you be a leftie?


----------



## Macquack (16 September 2012)

sails said:


> Where did he say that?
> 
> Your posts indicate that you support this bizarre labor government - why wouldn't you be a leftie?




You are guilty of the same simplistic "branding" of anyone who has a different opinion to yours.

"you support this bizarre labor government - why wouldn't you be a leftie?". What a ridiculous statement.


----------



## drsmith (16 September 2012)

Insiders last week wasn't too bad. At least there was a balance of views from the panel.

I feel though that it will generally continue to be a Labor wake until the day the last rites are finally read to this decaying government by the electorate.

They are now only preaching to the faithful.


----------



## Calliope (16 September 2012)

Macquack said:


> You are guilty of the same simplistic "branding" of anyone who has a different opinion to yours.
> 
> "you support this bizarre labor government - why wouldn't you be a leftie?". What a ridiculous statement.




Well Mr MacQuack, if you look like a duck, quack like a duck and walk like a duck, then you probably are a duck.


----------



## sails (16 September 2012)

Macquack said:


> You are guilty of the same simplistic "branding" of anyone who has a different opinion to yours.
> 
> "you support this bizarre labor government - why wouldn't you be a leftie?". What a ridiculous statement.




There are two sides to this coin.  I have been branded as a rightie because I don't like this bizarre labor government.  So you agree that is ridiculous?...


----------



## Macquack (16 September 2012)

sails said:


> There are two sides to this coin.  I have been branded as a rightie because I don't like this bizarre labor government.  So you agree that is ridiculous?...




Yes


----------



## Julia (20 September 2012)

Anyone watch Leigh Sales with Bob Brown last night?   No one could have accused her of being soft!
Poor old Bob looked a bit stunned.


----------



## pilots (20 September 2012)

Julia said:


> Anyone watch Leigh Sales with Bob Brown last night?   No one could have accused her of being soft!
> Poor old Bob looked a bit stunned.




Bob will kook more stunned after we go to the polls next year.


----------



## UMike (20 September 2012)

Calliope said:


> Had to turn off Insiders this morning; compere, guest and panel 100% to the left. Perhaps Insiders is part of the Labor's dirt unit, "Get Abbott" campaign.



Must say that since the Bolt report started the Insiders seem determinded to lean even further to the left.


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2012)

Julia said:


> Anyone watch Leigh Sales with Bob Brown last night?   No one could have accused her of being soft!
> Poor old Bob looked a bit stunned.



Can't put a finger on it specifically, but I didn't think he looked all that well.


----------



## pilots (21 September 2012)

drsmith said:


> Can't put a finger on it specifically, but I didn't think he looked all that well.




My wife said the same thing as soon as she saw him, could that be the reason he has retired???.


----------



## Miss Hale (21 September 2012)

pilots said:


> My wife said the same thing as soon as she saw him, could that be the reason he has retired???.




I thought that even before he retired, he seemed to be getting a bit muddled at times in this answers (I mean more so than Greens pollies usually are  ) and looked a lot older all of a sudden.  Wasn't at all surprised when he announced his retirement.


----------



## dutchie (23 November 2012)

Cassidy: It hinges on this approach to journalism these days, which seems to be that, 'I'm not making an allegation, I'm asking a question'. Well I ask you, Jon Faine, did you cheat in Year 12? Did you cheat when you put your CV into the ABC to get a job? I don't know. I have no evidence to suggest you did. I'm just asking the question, Jon.


How shallow is Barry Cassidy??


Pooh-poohing continues as the ABC's Dream Team ponders why journalists ask questions 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ts-ask-questions/story-fn72xczz-1226522314626


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2012)

Our unbiased ABC in fine form. :frown:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/victoria/20...c-plann.html?site=melbourne&program=melbourne

Listen to the audio of John Faine interviewing Michael Smith.


----------



## sails (24 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Our unbiased ABC in fine form. :frown:
> 
> http://blogs.abc.net.au/victoria/20...c-plann.html?site=melbourne&program=melbourne
> 
> Listen to the audio of John Faine interviewing Michael Smith.




I didn't have time to listen to the interview, but a quick scan on the comments show many are not happy with Faine's handling of it.  When will the ABC get it that they are paid by ALL taxpayers to provide an unbiased and balanced viewpoint.

This is one of the comments taken down and found on Michael Smith's website:

"Very disappointed John by your blatant journalistic bias on the AWU story. This story has gone way beyond the point where a serious investigative reporter can reasonably dismiss the case as ranting 'birthers' or right wing trogs. I'm an ardent Labour and union supporter. I believe passionately in the light on the hill. But I think the issues in the AWU case go right to the heart of what's wrong institutionally with the Australian Labor Party.

Judging from your comments this morning, I don't expect this comment to get a public airing but I do urge you (as a listener who has had nothing but respect for you for so many years) to consider the veracity of the categorical denial by Julia Gillard that she knew about the mortgage obtained by Wilson (in Blewitt's name) on the Kerr St property. She flatly denied last night in her statement that she had any recollection of her having any role in organising the mortgage for Wilson's blatantly fraudulent purchase. OK...consider this:

If Ms Gillard truly had no role in the mortgage then how is it that other documents in the publicly available conveyancing file clearly show what she has said cannot possibly be true - sourced to those documents. Not only is there the document referred to on last night's Seven Thirty Report (which records her involvement - albeit denied by her), there is also a file note on the file recording how Julia also asked for a memo on what higher interest rates would be charged on that mortgage if the mortgagee breached certain clauses. Ms Gillard asked for it in writing..and obtained the detail from her then PA.

This is significant because it proves - definitively - that Ms Gillard is not telling the truth about her supposed lack of knowledge of the mortgage at the time. She clearly knew about the mortgage and she directed the letter not to the registered owner (Blewitt) but to the real beneficiary, Bruce Wilson.

Your disgraceful attempt to use a character attack on Blewitt to discredit his evidence to Police does you no service. What you don't seem to understand is that Blewitt admits he's a crook - his sister's allegation is not something he disputes. He admits it. Now he's decided to make a clean breast of it.

You are a disgrace to your profession. 
I will not be listening to you again."​
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...on-faine-website-its-now-been-taken-down.html


----------



## Calliope (24 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Our unbiased ABC in fine form. :frown:
> 
> http://blogs.abc.net.au/victoria/20...c-plann.html?site=melbourne&program=melbourne
> 
> Listen to the audio of John Faine interviewing Michael Smith.




Jon Faine is the most loathsome man on radio. He makes Alan Jones look like a saint.


----------



## Logique (25 November 2012)

Expect some furious circling of the wagons on ALP Insiders this morning.  It will go something like this: "such a bothersome, trivial, 20 year old issue. Far more important things to think about." 

The ALP is on the horns of a dilemma, the parrots in the pet shops are chirping that Rudd has a better chance of winning the election.


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

Logique said:


> Expect some furious circling of the wagons on ALP Insiders this morning.  It will go something like this: "such a bothersome, trivial, 20 year old issue. Far more important things to think about."



In denial, they are standing over the grave hoping their beloved will show some signs of life.

In their defence of Labor, even Craig Thomson got praise in the talking pictures segment.


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> In denial, they are standing over the grave hoping their beloved will show some signs of life.
> 
> In their defence of Labor, even Craig Thomson got praise in the talking pictures segment.




I think the ABC should find as many shonky crims as possible with allegations funded by politic enemy's   of the government and repeat them continuously that way they could really lift their credibility...................with...........you!


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> I think the ABC should find as many shonky crims as possible with allegations funded by politic enemy's   of the government and repeat them continuously that way they could really lift their credibility...................with...........you!



Insiders could lift its credibility with the public at large by a little less worship at the alter of Labor and the likes of Craig Thomson.

I think Andrew Bolt's show now outrates Insiders.


----------



## moXJO (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Insiders could lift its credibility with the public at large by a little less worship at the alter of Labor and the likes of Craig Thomson.
> 
> I think Andrew Bolt's show now outrates Insiders.




Yeah talk about a labor luvie love in. I noticed they all quickly changed their tune when Rudd was ousted. Barry lost any credibility years ago.


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Insiders could lift its credibility with the public at large by a little less worship at the alter of Labor and the likes of Craig Thomson.
> 
> I think Andrew Bolt's show now outrates Insiders.





Lets see Laura Tingle daughter of shooters party MP, Laura Tingle

The Australian Financial Review's political editor Laura Tingle has spent most of her 30 year journalism career covering federal politics. She has worked for The Australian, The Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Australian Financial Review as an economics correspondent and political correspondent. She is the author of Chasing the Future - a book about the political and economic fallout of the recession of the early 1990s - and a winner of a Walkley Award for excellence in journalism and the Paul Lyneham Award for Press Gallery Journalism.

Andrew Probyn

Andrew Probyn has been the federal political editor and Canberra bureau chief for the West Australian since 2005. He has spent more than a decade in the Federal Press Gallery, first with the Herald Sun. Andrew also spent two years working for the ABC in Tasmania as state political reporter. He was the winner of the Melbourne Press Club's Gold Quill award in 2001 (shared with Michael Harvey) for his exclusive stories on the Peter Reith Telecard affair and in 2007 he won the political reporting prize at the WA Media Awards for his stories on the Kevin Rudd-Brian Burke affair.



Bolts show is pure comedy.


----------



## sails (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> ,,,Bolts show is pure comedy.




Haha - obviously many don't agree with you! 
But keep your head in the sand if you feel comfortable there!


----------



## Knobby22 (26 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Bolts show is pure comedy.




I sometimes think Bolt himself wonders about what he has been told to say.
I don't find it that funny but very awkward and a little embarrassing. I would be ashamed to show this show to a visiting tourist from Britain. It seems so poorly researched and the sets look wonky.


----------



## white_goodman (26 November 2012)

Q+A is pure comedy 99% of the time aswell, just look at the audience and you have to laugh


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> I sometimes think Bolt himself wonders about what he has been told to say.
> I don't find it that funny but very awkward and a little embarrassing. I would be ashamed to show this show to a visiting tourist from Britain. It seems so poorly researched and the sets look wonky.



I don't think you'll get too much argument defending Andrew Bolt as unbiased.

The difference though is that the ABC is publically funded.


----------



## Calliope (2 December 2012)

Barry Cassidy's selection of the final panel for the year was a stroke of genius. At first glance you might think that with three News Ltd panellists that it would be pro-Abbot. Not so;

Nikki Sava, columnist for the Australian and certainly pro-Abbott and anti-Gillard.

Malcolm Farr, News Ltd. journalist on the Canberra Press Gallery. Pro-Gillard and anti-Abbott. (the standard Press Gallery position)

Dennis Atkins, Courier-Mail political writer. Pro-Gillard and anti-Abbott *and* anti-Newman.

Nikki Sava was ambushed.

Just to rub in the left-leaning ascendency the guest interviewee was Christine Milne.


----------



## sails (2 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> Barry Cassidy's selection of the final panel for the year was a stroke of genius. At first glance you might think that with three News Ltd panellists that it would be pro-Abbot. Not so;
> 
> Nikki Sava, columnist for the Australian and certainly pro-Abbott and anti-Gillard.
> 
> ...




Perhaps that is exactly the reason more people are tuning into the Bolt report than Insiders!  



> Bolt now attracts more viewers in total than Insiders on ABC TV does. Insiders’ ABC1 audience from 9 to 10am has fallen 11.7% to 173,000 this year (still well ahead of Bolt) from 195,000 in 2011. The News 24 simulcast audience is up more than 21% to 56,000 from 46,000 and the evening repeat on News 24 has up more than 27% to 32,000 from 26,000. On several occasions in the past three months, Bolt’s 10am audience has exceeded that of Insiders which has fallen into a bit of trough since midyear.




http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/11/21...to-his-defender-lachlan/?wpmp_switcher=mobile


----------



## noco (2 December 2012)

sails said:


> Perhaps that is exactly the reason more people are tuning into the Bolt report than Insiders!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/11/21...to-his-defender-lachlan/?wpmp_switcher=mobile




+1 I agree.


----------



## IFocus (2 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> Barry Cassidy's selection of the final panel for the year was a stroke of genius. At first glance you might think that with three News Ltd panellists that it would be pro-Abbot. Not so;
> 
> Nikki Sava, columnist for the Australian and certainly pro-Abbott and anti-Gillard.




Nikki Sava is quite fair in her commentary not scared to point out Abbotts folly's but yes pro Liberal



> Malcolm Farr, News Ltd. journalist on the Canberra Press Gallery. Pro-Gillard and anti-Abbott. (the standard Press Gallery position)




Malcolm like's to stick it to everyone would not say pro Labor at all he did make the point that the week was political not truth seeking any mug can see that



> Dennis Atkins, Courier-Mail political writer. Pro-Gillard and anti-Abbott *and* anti-Newman.




Dennis Atkins actually writes to the facts old school, Newman is really going to keep Federal Labor in power the way he going 



> Nikki Sava was ambushed.




Thought Nicky stuck up for her self refused to be talked over.



> Just to rub in the left-leaning ascendency the guest interviewee was Christine Milne.




No Coalition will go on least of all Abbott

As for the Insiders vers Bolt, I can understand the rusted on Libs watching Bolt and others watching for a laugh but really he is a joke no one that behaves like him could be taken seriously.

I haven't seen Bolts Liberal infomercial shown else where once where as every other political show gets referenced

The insiders is all class will miss it until it starts up again next year


----------



## McLovin (2 December 2012)

sails said:


> Perhaps that is exactly the reason more people are tuning into the Bolt report than Insiders!




The sensationalist garbage that passes for current affairs on ACA and TT get over a million viewers. From the little I've seen of Bolt, his show would target that same demographic.

Lachie is just trying to turn Ten into a mini Faux News, with guys like Bolt and that idiot on the morning show.


----------



## moXJO (2 December 2012)

Insiders turned into a steaming pile years ago. I wonder if it will get any better once Abbott gets in.


----------



## drsmith (2 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> The insiders is all class will miss it until it starts up again next year



Both Insiders and Bolt are biased, but between the two of them, there's an approximate balance.

Peter Costello was good on Bolt today.


----------



## sails (3 December 2012)

Yesterday’s audience results:

    Insiders (9am) - 149,000

    The Bolt Report (10am) - 160,000

    Meet The Press (10.30am) - 95,000

    The Bolt Report (4.30pm) - 117,000​
Interesting that so many do not follow on with "Meet The Press" after Bolt is finished.  Gillard was on yesterday and I was quick to put an end to the droning of "sleaze".  Hypocrital, isn't it?  The one she accuses of sleaze is a happily married man with three lovely daughters while she has a history of married men...

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...inishing_with_a_bang_from_us_whimper_from_pm/


----------



## Julia (3 December 2012)

sails said:


> [
> Interesting that so many do not follow on with "Meet The Press" after Bolt is finished.  Gillard was on yesterday and I was quick to put an end to the droning of "sleaze".  Hypocrital, isn't it?  The one she accuses of sleaze is a happily married man with three lovely daughters while she has a history of married men...



Yes, the irony is inescapable, especially now that we have seen the type of people with whom she has associated in the form of Wilson and Blewitt.


----------



## drsmith (13 December 2012)

Janet Albrechtsen gets an invitation to join the ABC's Insiders program.

I think she's declined.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-into-groupthink/story-e6frg7bo-1226534885161


----------



## Logique (13 December 2012)

I think "ALP Insiders" should be boycotted by all centrist and conservative guests, just as The Bolt Report is boycotted by Labor. Albrechtsen would only have been there for tokenist reasons, as was Bolt - to imply legitimacy and balance, but always carefully outnumbered.  

"ALP Insiders" isn't just Labor leaning, it's trades union, climate catastrophe, haughty, sneering factional Left. I find it unwatchable these days.


----------



## IFocus (13 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> Janet Albrechtsen gets an invitation to join the ABC's Insiders program.
> 
> I think she's declined.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-into-groupthink/story-e6frg7bo-1226534885161




Maybe because Albrechtsen would be up against 30 year + political  veterans who would make her look as ordinary as she is. I have read quite a bit of her dialogue and cannot remember any of analytical worth mostly just bile and spite.


----------



## IFocus (13 December 2012)

drsmith;739716[B said:
			
		

> ]Both Insiders and Bolt are biased[/B], but between the two of them, there's an approximate balance.




Insiders has long standing Canberra press gallery political jurnos who talk to both sides of politics and conduct analysis of the political landscape in Australia.

Bolt has a bunch of shallow Liberal flunky's who all nod their head gravely as he dribbles Liberal smear and spin with that stupid self indulgent smirk.


Balance?


----------



## Julia (13 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> Maybe because Albrechtsen would be up against 30 year + political  veterans who would make her look as ordinary as she is. I have read quite a bit of her dialogue and cannot remember any of analytical worth mostly just bile and spite.



Of course Ms Albrechtsen would be unappealing to you.  She is too articulate and realistic, and above all, is philosophically disposed toward the Libs.

If you're going to consider 'bile and spite' you could never find a better example than your Prime Minister.  She has it in spades.


----------



## IFocus (13 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Of course Ms Albrechtsen would be unappealing to you.  She is too articulate and realistic, and above all, is philosophically disposed toward the Libs.
> 
> If you're going to consider 'bile and spite' you could never find a better example than your Prime Minister.  She has it in spades.





What absolute rubbishy you clearly have never read the shallow spite and bile Albrechtsen puts forth.

Bolt can construct more sense than her


----------



## Julia (13 December 2012)

I wouldn't be commenting on her contributions if I'd not read what she writes.

Instead of making spiteful comments, why can't you just simply say you philosophically disagree with her.
No need for the vitriol.


----------



## white_goodman (14 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> Insiders has long standing Canberra press gallery political jurnos who talk to both sides of politics and conduct analysis of the political landscape in Australia.
> 
> Bolt has a bunch of shallow Liberal flunky's who all nod their head gravely as he dribbles Liberal smear and spin with that stupid self indulgent smirk.
> 
> ...




what a warped perception of reality you have, must be refreshing


----------



## IFocus (20 December 2012)

Extracting a confession out of Abbott starts the smear 


ABC's Leigh Sales cleared of bias over Abbott interview

The broadcasting watchdog has dismissed allegations that 7.30 host Leigh Sales showed bias against Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) investigated the interview, broadcast on August 22, in which Ms Sales grilled Mr Abbott over his claim that BHP suspended its Olympic Dam project as a result of the Federal Government's carbon tax.

Ms Sales extracted an admission from Mr Abbott that he had not read BHP's statement, which made no mention of the tax.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...t-interview-20121220-2bomp.html#ixzz2FZN6eLcb


----------



## MrBurns (20 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> Extracting a confession out of Abbott starts the smear
> 
> 
> ABC's Leigh Sales cleared of bias over Abbott interview
> ...




You mean *broadcasting lapdog* don't you ?


----------



## sails (20 December 2012)

IF, your continual clutching of straws over the opposition is rather stupid, imo.

You never comment on Gillard and what she and swan have done with the $20 billion in the bank which is now something like $260 billion on loan.

You never want indepth information about Gillard's involvement in setting up a slush fund from which something close to $2 million of union members funds have disappeared.  Questions that need to be  answered as she now holds the highest office in the land.

Where is your outrage over the thousands of people arriving here on a daily basis taking welfare from our working australian families?

Where is your outrage at the moves afoot to curb our freedom of speech?

Where is your outrage at the nasty outbursts dished out by Gillard in parliament?  Calling Abbott a misogynist while not hardly a peep about Slipper?

Are you an import like McTernan?


----------



## noco (20 December 2012)

For normal viewing of the ABC make sur your head is tilted left.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...iewing-lean-left/story-e6frg99o-1226540682310


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (20 December 2012)

I think both sides of the political divide can go on forever citing their beliefs in bias or non-bias and it becomes a conversation of the deaf.

If I were to become Prime Minister, the first action I would take to make the ABC a more legitimate voice for all Australians would be to move it's headquarters out, in to regional or rural Australia.

Incestuous behaviour is inevitable when bodies who believe they are beautiful or talented are in too close proximity.

Many of the ABC Executive, Broadcasters, Commentators and Guest luvvies all live within a 15km radius of each other in either Sydney or Melbourne.

This is not healthy.

They behave like incestuous families, denying that there is any illicit behaviour and that if there is, that it is understandable and they are sorry and it will not occur again.

So these incestuous rabbits work together, socialise together, recruit new members to their hutches who are of the "right stuff".

It is not then difficult to see how the ABC is in such a parlous state at the moment, with it's news and current affairs programmes ignored by over 85% of the population.

This malaise was noted in the recent report in to the BBC, a sister organisation to the ABC, where it was found nobody had the balls or ovaries to take a stand against a prevailing orthodoxy. The BBC is critically damaged as a result.

So to save our ABC, not the ABC of the litter glitteratti and luvvies, let us decentralise it, and move it away from the tired old farts who presently run it in Sydney and Melbourne.

gg


----------



## Julia (20 December 2012)

sails said:


> You never want indepth information about Gillard's involvement in setting up a slush fund from which something close to $2 million of union members funds have disappeared.  Questions that need to be  answered as she now holds the highest office in the land.



Quite the best and most clear account I've read of this affair is in an article by Terry O'Connor, former head of West Australia's Anti-Corruption Commission.
Well worth reading imo.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-answer-on-awu/story-e6frgd0x-1226539989208


----------



## noco (20 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Quite the best and most clear account I've read of this affair is in an article by Terry O'Connor, former head of West Australia's Anti-Corruption Commission.
> Well worth reading imo.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-answer-on-awu/story-e6frgd0x-1226539989208




Julia, that is the same link I posted yesterday.

Refer post 1391 "Does Gillard inspire confidence."


----------



## Julia (20 December 2012)

noco said:


> Julia, that is the same link I posted yesterday.
> 
> Refer post 1391 "Does Gillard inspire confidence."



OK, sorry, noco.  I didn't notice your post and only got round to reading that part of the paper today.


----------



## IFocus (20 December 2012)

sails said:


> Where is your outrage




I try to leave the rants of outrage to the right side of politics......seriously


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (20 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> I try to leave the rants of outrage to the right side of politics......seriously




As do the ABC Governance Committees.

For the rest of us long suffering listeners/viewers I should quote Terence MacSwiney.



> "It is not those who can inflict the most, but those that can suffer the most who will conquer."




gg


----------



## Calliope (21 December 2012)

noco said:


> Julia, that is the same link I posted yesterday.
> 
> Refer post 1391 "Does Gillard inspire confidence."




Yes, and I posted it before this.



> Re: The Gillard Government
> Even Blind Freddie would conclude that Gillard has a prima facie case to answer on the AWU Wilson/Blewitt scam. This is a QC's opinion.
> 
> "However, without some explanation from her as to what occurred, there is, in my opinion, a prima facie case that she could have been charged along with Blewitt as she drafted the rules of the association for Blewitt knowing that the rules did not disclose the purpose for which the association was being incorporated."
> ...


----------



## dutchie (21 December 2012)

The ABC is a joke.
This morning Michael Rowlands insinuated that the ABC was not biased.
The next minute whilst interviewing Joe Hockey about the latest ALP stuff up (the NON surplus) he is trying to score points with Hockey about how Howard introduced the GST (quoting how he had flipped on previous statements - Hockey brought him back to reality by saying he took the change to an election).

Rowlands, Carvalho and the other presenters are hypocrites.

I remember Karina Carvalho being mocking and aggressive with Tony Abbott one morning. This sort of behaviour should be left to the shock jocks.

So much for the ABC's independence.

I resent paying for ALP advertising!


----------



## Julia (21 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> Yes, and I posted it before this.



So at least three of us have read The Australian this Wednesday.  At different times.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (21 December 2012)

Julia said:


> So at least three of us have read The Australian this Wednesday.  At different times.




It's a two way street, Julia, the Oz staff read ASF daily.

A favourite ASF saying in a headline today.



> Our cup runneth over as the *ABC muppets* ponder the meaning of groupthink




gg


----------



## explod (21 December 2012)

You should listen to Country ABC from Bendigo, it is so biased *right *wing that it keeps hitting the truth wall.

And on the global hysteria it leaves wayneL for dead.


----------



## Julia (21 December 2012)

explod said:


> You should listen to Country ABC from Bendigo, it is so biased *right *wing that it keeps hitting the truth wall.
> 
> And on the global hysteria it leaves wayneL for dead.



Presumably this is part of the ABC Local Radio network?   This network seems content to leave focus and content pretty much to individual presenters/producers, unlike Radio National which would suit you much better Explod with its incessant and determined left bias.


----------



## explod (22 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Presumably this is part of the ABC Local Radio network?   This network seems content to leave focus and content pretty much to individual presenters/producers, unlike Radio National which would suit you much better Explod with its incessant and determined left bias.




Probably correct Julia as I rarely listen in to radio or watch TV.

And I do need to mind my own business a bit more on some of the threads.


----------



## Miss Hale (22 December 2012)

explod said:


> You should listen to Country ABC from Bendigo, it is so biased *right *wing that it keeps hitting the truth wall.
> 
> And on the global hysteria it leaves wayneL for dead.




Either you are joking or it has changed a lot since I listened to it for many years up until about 18 months ago.  I found it incredibibly left leaning, just as bad as it's Melbourne counterpart. They way they kowtowed to the local Labor pollies was pathetic (Jacinta Allen being their favourite).


----------



## Julia (22 December 2012)

Whilst I am as irritated as most here with the ABC's political bias, I'd be sorry if an incoming Liberal government slashed their funding too much.

They have some wonderful and thoughtful programs on Radio National on literature, music, medical and psychological innovation plus many panel discussions and interviews on an extraordinarily wide range of topics
For those of us living in regional areas it can be an oasis in a cultural desert.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Whilst I am as irritated as most here with the ABC's political bias, I'd be sorry if an incoming Liberal government slashed their funding too much.
> 
> They have some wonderful and thoughtful programs on Radio National on literature, music, medical and psychological innovation plus many panel discussions and interviews on an extraordinarily wide range of topics
> For those of us living in regional areas it can be an oasis in a cultural desert.




I would have to disagree with you there Julia.

I have many mates from the former Eastern Bloc, Iron Curtain countries, and for those who know me, I am an inveterate hater of North Korea, on the "Caption a Photo" thread on ASF. Left is not good.

There is a common argument to sustain left groupthink.

They do some things good, but intertwined with it all is a leftist agenda.

I remember when Cathy Freeman won gold, and the sports commentator on ABC National was deprecating about Australians in general, when many good Indigenous and White Australians at her home Athletics Club in Slade Point Mackay had spent years fostering her incredible talent to excellence. 

The ABC will be just as good when the left groupthink luvvies are paid out.

The BBC in the UK is in convulsions over a paedophile scandal, and the basis of that is groupthink.

Nobody questions, there is no recourse to evidence or fairness in either the ABC or the BBC.

If every leftie, left the ABC, it would still deliver excellent programmes.

It is in large part due to a Sydney and Melbourne clique, who decide what is best for the rest of Australia.

gg


----------



## Julia (22 December 2012)

Well, gg, we will all comment as a result of what we experience.  If I'm listening to Richard Gill explaining the nuances of a symphony, or being prompted to read a new writer as a result of an insightful interview with the author, I am not overcome by political groupthink, much as I acknowledge its existence in many areas of the ABC.


----------



## Calliope (23 December 2012)

Climate lunacy rules at Aunty.



> These days it is the green movement and the apocalyptic anxiety about man-made global warming that have become the cults du jour, "the opiate of the masses". However, Australians are generally rather pragmatic and, as the climate has failed to conform to most of the doomsayers' computer modelling, popular support for measures supposed to combat global warming has waned.
> 
> This presents problems for those journalists and public intellectuals who embraced the cause uncritically in the early days, and haven't seen the need to express any reservations



.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...y-rules-at-aunty/story-e6frg7ko-1226541450970


----------



## Some Dude (23 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> "as the climate has failed to conform to most of the doomsayers' computer modelling"




Did they indicate where that derived that assertion from?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 December 2012)

Some Dude said:


> Did they indicate where that derived that conclusion from?




That derived that conclusion from daily sticking that's head out that's window and observing.

gg


----------



## Some Dude (23 December 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> That derived that conclusion from daily sticking that's head out that's window and observing.
> 
> gg




Thank for so kindly and helpfully identifying my grammatical error thus providing me with the opportunity to correct a substantial error 



Calliope said:


> "as the climate has failed to conform to most of the doomsayers' computer modelling"




Did they indicate where _they_ derived that assertion from? Serious question as I have not seen an analysis of climate modelling that substantiates that assertion and I would like to review where they derived that from.


----------



## Calliope (24 December 2012)

Some Dude said:


> Did they indicate where _they_ derived that assertion from? Serious question as I have not seen an analysis of climate modelling that substantiates that assertion and I would like to review where they derived that from.





You should direct your "serious question" to "they" whoever "they" are. This is the paragraph in the article;




> However, Australians are generally rather pragmatic and, as the climate has failed to conform to most of the doomsayers' computer modelling, popular support for measures supposed to combat global warming has waned



. 

If you really want to know, try Google.


----------



## Some Dude (24 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> You should direct your "serious question" to "they" whoever "they" are. This is the paragraph in the article;
> 
> 
> .
> ...




As I already stated, I have not seen analysis (caveat: serious analysis) of the modelling that substantiates the assertion. Setting aside for the moment that I don't have access to the content of the article, it would be pointless to randomly search google without knowing specifically what the source or sources they have used in drawing their opinion. As it contradicts my experience and knowledge, I would like to avail myself of how they came to that position and given that you seem to want to inform others of the article, you are the obvious person to ask.

I will continue to direct such questions to "those" who post items of interest.


----------



## Ves (24 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Whilst I am as irritated as most here with the ABC's political bias, I'd be sorry if an incoming Liberal government slashed their funding too much.
> 
> They have some wonderful and thoughtful programs on Radio National on literature, music, medical and psychological innovation plus many panel discussions and interviews on an extraordinarily wide range of topics
> For those of us living in regional areas it can be an oasis in a cultural desert.



Really well said, Julia.

I think this thread basically boils down to the following (very) human conundrum:  somewhere on a radio station, that is funded by the government for the people, there is a person or persons, that disagree with my political opinion and I am not happy about this because I could not imagine anyone disagreeing with me, so I will ignore everything else good that the ABC do until these people stop or at least start agreeing with the political party that I follow!

That's my satirical imput for today.


----------



## Ves (24 December 2012)

By the way, does anyone remember this study of the political bias of the Australian media by E S of A?

http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/MediaSlant.pdf


----------



## Some Dude (24 December 2012)

Ves said:


> By the way, does anyone remember this study of the political bias of the Australian media by E S of A?
> 
> http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/MediaSlant.pdf




That was a great read. Thanks!

Are you aware of any similar analysis as tables 4 and 5 for TV and radio?


----------



## Ves (24 December 2012)

Some Dude said:


> That was a great read. Thanks!
> 
> Are you aware of any similar analysis as tables 4 and 5 for TV and radio?



Nope!


----------



## Logique (9 January 2013)

We love to sink the slipper when the political commissars get wound up on Radio National. 

However in this case, credit where it's due - ABC Local Radio have been outstanding during the NSW fire emergency, providing a great community information service. 

Well done ABC Local Radio. Keep at it guys and gals, because the hot weather is coming back. 

It got to 41C here yesterday, I wanted to stab myself. But phew, a southerly came in, thank goodness.


----------



## MrBurns (9 January 2013)

Logique said:


> We love to sink the slipper when the political commissars get wound up on Radio National.
> 
> However in this case, credit where it's due - ABC Local Radio have been outstanding during the NSW fire emergency, providing a great community information service.
> 
> ...




I got to say I love the warmer weather but a week of mid high thirties edging up to 40 and I've absolutley had it.

Good to be reminded of that before I move north one day from Vic.


----------



## Some Dude (9 January 2013)

Logique said:


> We love to sink the slipper when the political commissars get wound up on Radio National.
> 
> However in this case, credit where it's due - ABC Local Radio have been outstanding during the NSW fire emergency, providing a great community information service.
> 
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 January 2013)

Logique said:


> We love to sink the slipper when the political commissars get wound up on Radio National.
> 
> However in this case, credit where it's due - ABC Local Radio have been outstanding during the NSW fire emergency, providing a great community information service.
> 
> ...




ABC Local Radio are excellent.

We do not consider them "proper" leftie ABC millionaires, like the Radio National ones , in Queensland.

Great coverage from all the Radio National crew kept us going over those days and nights of Cyclone Yasi.

It is a shame they are drowned out by the Commissars.

Good people, working hard for all the community as a public broadcaster should.

My 8 cents worth anyway.

gg


----------



## Some Dude (9 January 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> ABC Local Radio are excellent.
> 
> We do not consider them "proper" leftie ABC millionaires, like the Radio National ones , in Queensland.
> 
> ...




It's amazing how differently people perceived things once the luxury of not needing it dissipates. It's all the same people, just that sometimes they are going to say things you don't like.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 January 2013)

Julia said:


> Well, gg, we will all comment as a result of what we experience.  If I'm listening to Richard Gill explaining the nuances of a symphony, or being prompted to read a new writer as a result of an insightful interview with the author, I am not overcome by political groupthink, much as I acknowledge its existence in many areas of the ABC.




I would agree Julia, but when it is good, it is very good, and when it is bad it is awful.

The better presenters are on ordinary wages and not part of the "Luvvie Millionaires" row of presenters who appeal only to twitterati and not ordinary Australians.

gg


----------



## drsmith (31 January 2013)

ABC 774 radio presenter John Faine finished up in the poop over his handling of the AWU slush fund allegations



> The interviews, conducted on November 23 with former 2UE presenter Michael Smith and The Age's editor-at-large Mark Baker, led to at least one formal complaint to the ABC's complaints department.






> "Audience and Consumer Affairs have concluded that the interviews were not conducted in keeping with ABC impartiality requirements. The argumentative style of the interviews by Mr Faine, combined with a pattern of strongly stated personal opinions that at times oversimplified the issues at hand, was not in keeping with the ABC's rigorous impartiality standards for current affairs content.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...senter-jon-faine/story-e6frg996-1226565457692


----------



## shermerhorn (31 January 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I was stopped at a State/Federal Roadblock today with about 10 workers on a major highway, and was forced to listen to ABC Radio National Rural Report.
> 
> I expected to be regaled with low prices, lack of rain, etc. etc. but instead suffered 18 minutes of bloody global warming claptrap.
> 
> ...




LOL. Clearly you're not on the land. Successful farmers don't have the choice not to listen to some level of science if they want to make a buck. 
We might not like greenies, or the science they pedal. but I'd like to see fire fought with fire (as opposed to the usual - some yardbird talking out their backside without doing any research of their own). so far most of the world's scientists agree that global warming is real. if that's an issue for someone, it just means they like to put their head up their backside, it's nothing to be proud of either. it doesn't help that most of the little that goes against the trend comes from the fossil fuel sector either. sheesh. then the question is do we care.

Bottom line is, as an investor, if you can't at least work out what denier scientists and greenie scientists agree on - then good luck on the exchange. Unless of course your in media. The more ignorance there, the faster you'll make a buck. and many have  Mind you, you have to know when to jump ship.


As an aside, I'm not sure how it's political if it's not even a point of difference in the country's political parties. No major party has come out saying climate change isn't real or they know better than the science they've looked at - well, not clearly anyway. It might be better if there was more 'coping with wet and dry' farm advice on the wire though, rather than the odd program. But that's another story.


----------



## Calliope (31 January 2013)

shermerhorn said:


> .
> We might not like greenies, or the science they *pedal*.




Perhaps you mean peddle.


----------



## Miss Hale (31 January 2013)

drsmith said:


> ABC 774 radio presenter John Faine finished up in the poop over his handling of the AWU slush fund allegations
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What will be his punishment then, a slap on the wrist with a limp lettuce leaf?  Will he be making an on-air apology?  Perhaps he will be suspended for a few weeks...somehow I doubt it


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 January 2013)

Calliope said:


> Perhaps you mean peddle.




lol   peddle but only with a bicycle helmet.

gg



Miss Hale said:


> What will be his punishment then, a slap on the wrist with a limp lettuce leaf?  Will he be making an on-air apology?  Perhaps he will be suspended for a few weeks...somehow I doubt it




It's like many pre-GFC public service types of employment.

I have no idea what sort of a contract he is on, if it is a company negotiated contract with the ABC, unless he has broken his contract there is nothing they can do.

If he is an employee, there is probably nothing they will do. Send it to HR and counsel him over a latte or a bicycle helmet.

In any case it is immaterial.

We need guys like Faine to show the inanity of groupthink. I'd keep him.

In 200 years they will dig his tapes up and piss themselves laughing.

gg


----------



## medicowallet (31 January 2013)

After a long day in the theatre, I hopped into my car, and turned on the radio to hear a short snippet about Thomson's arrest.


I thought I could enjoy a cold drink and watch the 7:30 report about this, but it was just a small segment.  I understand it was done to death before, but a real political analysis about Gillard's miraculous choice to pseudo-call an election the day before this, and along with her support etc. surely warranted a bit of an analysis.

Does it really surprise me?

MW


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 January 2013)

medicowallet said:


> After a long day in the theatre, I hopped into my car, and turned on the radio to hear a short snippet about Thomson's arrest.
> 
> 
> I thought I could enjoy a cold drink and watch the 7:30 report about this, but it was just a small segment.  I understand it was done to death before, but a real political analysis about Gillard's miraculous choice to pseudo-call an election the day before this, and along with her support etc. surely warranted a bit of an analysis.
> ...




Agree mw, it was done to death in the SMH and Australian online, and probably didn't warrant much on 7.30, to be fair to them.

They will await a better dissection once the technicians have sprinkled some formaldehyde upon the matter.

I am slowly resurfacing from the Goldfield Ashes in Charters Towers, am just reconnecting with the wider world, but it got a muted response in the Public Bar this evening at the hotel.

Comments mostly rhymed with punt.

gg


----------



## Miss Hale (1 February 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's like many pre-GFC public service types of employment.
> 
> I have no idea what sort of a contract he is on, if it is a company negotiated contract with the ABC, unless he has broken his contract there is nothing they can do.
> 
> ...




Seems Faine is not prepared to take his slap on the wrist with a limp lettuce leaf anyway 

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/heres-another-fight-jon-faine-will-fight-his-employer.html

The arrogance of this man is incredible, he can't admit he is wrong.  Perhaps if he is so unhappy with the ABC he will resign


----------



## sptrawler (2 February 2013)

From what I have seen of the ABC, if I was the government I would sell it off.
It bows and scrapes to the government of the day, therefore it is of no value if you are not in government.
Just sell it off, which is a funny statement from me as I generally am against privatisation.
However through this period of government, to me, it has shown itself to be of no public benefit whatsoever.
It is not providing a public service, more an advertising media for the government of the day. I'm sure it would be the same whichever party was in office.
It may be an essential service, when I lived in the NW of WA in the late 60's to early 80's, they were the only service you recieved.
However now with the media footprint increasing, so the requirement for the ABC decreases and their dependence on government funding becomes more obvious.
Talk about being the master of your own demise.
Sad, just very sad.


----------



## drsmith (3 February 2013)

Insiders kicks off for 2013 this week.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/abc1/201302/programs/NC1376V001D2013-02-03T090130.htm

It will be instersting to see what they say, or don't.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (3 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> Insiders kicks off for 2013 this week.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/abc1/201302/programs/NC1376V001D2013-02-03T090130.htm
> 
> It will be instersting to see what they say, or don't.




I have stopped watching it, and won't ever again.

It is a Labor advertising slot, as far as I am concerned.

gg


----------



## banco (3 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> From what I have seen of the ABC, if I was the government I would sell it off.
> It bows and scrapes to the government of the day, therefore it is of no value if you are not in government.
> Just sell it off, which is a funny statement from me as I generally am against privatisation.
> However through this period of government, to me, it has shown itself to be of no public benefit whatsoever.
> ...




The commercial channels have no serious current affairs shows since sunday went off air.


----------



## bellenuit (4 February 2013)

I listened to a segment of ABC's Newsradio 24 this morning and when they came to the latest Newspoll figures, they said something like - the figures were bad for Labor, the coalition maintained their lead over Labor - and then went on to give the running results of their own poll which was "do you believe the validity of opinion polls" or something like that. 

I don't know what was said in earlier segments, but the results were truly bad for Labor and Gillard. The coalition did not just maintain their lead, but increased it. Their treatment of these results were in stark contrast to the treatment of the previous (or prior to previous) results where Labor seemed to be catching the coalition. Those results were done to death that particular day. And they didn't run an ABC poll on the validity of polls then. 

Needless to say the ABC's own poll showed that most put little credibility in the Newspoll results. However, i doubt when they started the ABC poll if they explained how Newspoll is conducted and also explained how the ABC poll would not qualify as a valid poll in itself, as it does not reflect an audience that is a representative cross-section of the populace.


----------



## Julia (4 February 2013)

In contrast, what I heard on RN was a very clear commentary on how bad the Newspoll was for Labor.
Fran Kelly was having Simon Crean on later but I missed that.


----------



## MrBurns (4 February 2013)

The latest article for comment in the Drum Forum on the ABC web site is about............................the mining boom, with all thats going on they dodge it with this, they are transparent and biased.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/thedrum/


----------



## drsmith (4 February 2013)

In this age of extreme political correctness, who can say poofter and get away with it ?

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3682019.htm


----------



## sptrawler (4 February 2013)

banco said:


> The commercial channels have no serious current affairs shows since sunday went off air.




That's very true, also the ABC business programmes are good. I just wish they would tone down the political bias toward the government of the day.


----------



## MrBurns (4 February 2013)

It's great to see the return of The Australian Story, 4 Corners Q&A and Lateline.


----------



## drsmith (4 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> It's great to see the return of The Australian Story, 4 Corners Q&A and Lateline.



Media Watch tonight will also be worth a look.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/media-watch-jon-faine-vs-michael-smith.html


----------



## MrBurns (4 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> Media Watch tonight will also be worth a look.
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/media-watch-jon-faine-vs-michael-smith.html




Yep forgot that one


----------



## Logique (13 February 2013)

*Viewers turning off ABC1, just ask the Insiders*
BY:CHRISTIAN KERR From: The Australian February 13, 2013 


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ask-the-insiders/story-fn59niix-1226576585548
> 
> THE ABC's flagship Sunday morning current affairs program *Insiders is losing a larger share of viewers than other dwindling news programs* on the national broadcaster's main channel as the corporation fails to meet a raft of key performance measures.
> 
> Briefing notes prepared for managing director Mark Scott for last October's Senate estimates hearings, obtained under Freedom of Information laws, concede *viewers are turning off the ABC* even as the broadcaster chases additional taxpayer funds....



...Subscription required :frown:


----------



## dutchie (13 February 2013)

Logique said:


> *Viewers turning off ABC1, just ask the Insiders*
> BY:CHRISTIAN KERR From: The Australian February 13, 2013
> ...Subscription required :frown:




or....

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ask-the-insiders/story-fn59niix-1226576585548


----------



## MrBurns (13 February 2013)

Logique said:


> *Viewers turning off ABC1, just ask the Insiders*
> BY:CHRISTIAN KERR From: The Australian February 13, 2013
> ...Subscription required :frown:




Doesnt suprise me , Cassidys lay back Labor promotion style is irritating at best.


----------



## Miss Hale (13 February 2013)

Logique said:


> *Viewers turning off ABC1, just ask the Insiders*
> BY:CHRISTIAN KERR From: The Australian February 13, 2013
> ...Subscription required :frown:




I'm not surprised either.  They made the mistake when the governement changed of not attacking the incumbents like they had previously, this just showed that they weren't in fact hard hitting but merely pro Labor.   When they continually apologise for the current government and focus on Abbott there really isn't much there to keep you interested.


----------



## noco (13 February 2013)

dutchie said:


> or....
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ask-the-insiders/story-fn59niix-1226576585548





And here are some comments from Paul Kelly to back it up.

The ABC Insiders Barry Cassidy is so biased towards the Labor Party. Is it any wonder viewers are turning off the ABC?

 I used to watch the program, but not any more. That Commo David Marr is enough to turn any body off the show.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ask-the-insiders/story-fn59niix-1226576585548


----------



## drsmith (13 February 2013)

Michael Smith has posted some numbers.



> Average audiences for 7.30 and Four Corners -  down 3%
> 
> Foreign Correspondent  - down 6%
> 
> ...




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...nt-expansion-and-its-excuses-for-failure.html


----------



## Logique (15 February 2013)

As with "ALP Insiders", I've given up on Q&A, but I'm sorry I missed it this week.  



> James Paterson’s Diary, 13 February 2013
> http://www.spectator.co.uk/australi...medium=rss&utm_campaign=james-patersons-diary
> 
> "..The best thing about appearing on Q&A...It’s logging on to Twitter afterwards and reading hundreds of abusive tweets from enraged lefties so that you know you’ve done your job.....
> ...


----------



## dutchie (15 February 2013)

James Paterson’s Diary, 13 February 2013
http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia...atersons-diary


A  sympathetic tweeter asks me why me and my colleagues bother turning up to events behind enemy lines. The obvious answer is that it is a great platform to advocate for freedom. *But it’s also true that sending the Left into fits of rage is actually pretty fun. And I think we provide a useful community service.* There’s even an online petition with 2,000 signatures calling for the IPA to be banned from the ABC. Without us, what would these people do with their lives?”

Same sort of forum community service provided by many posters here!

And it is fun !!!


----------



## sails (16 February 2013)

Logique said:


> As with "ALP Insiders", I've given up on Q&A, but I'm sorry I missed it this week.




Logique, here is the video of his comments on Roxon’s discrimination law - he explains it well:


----------



## Julia (16 February 2013)

Thanks for that, sails.  I've also given up watching Q & A, along with The Insiders.
Good to see James Paterson making his point so clearly.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 February 2013)

Julia said:


> Thanks for that, sails.  I've also given up watching Q & A, along with The Insiders.
> Good to see James Paterson making his point so clearly.




I missed the segment.

The IPA is a good think-tank, and James Paterson a good incisive speaker.

It is an organisation with a growing membership, worth joining if you value freedom.

http://ipa.org.au/

gg


----------



## Logique (17 February 2013)

sails said:


> Logique, here is the video of his comments on Roxon’s discrimination law - he explains it well:... [Youtube above]



 Thanks Sails, check the frowns on Jones and the other panellists. They're accustomed to marshalling Paterson's demographic.


----------



## drsmith (17 February 2013)

Even though Barry Cassidy gave Greg Combet a soft interview today on Insiders, Greg still looked very downbeat.


----------



## drsmith (24 February 2013)

A definite change in tone on Insiders this week. They've finally given up hope of any life from the decaying corpse that is the current Labor government.

Inetersting final tip as well. Internal polling (union I think it was) has primary Labor support in the NSW seat of Lindsay at 20%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Lindsay


----------



## Miss Hale (24 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> A definite change in tone on Insiders this week. They've finally given up hope of any life from the decaying corpse that is the current Labor government.
> [/url]




Yes, I thought that too Dr Smith, definitely a change in tone and more focus on Labor and the Greens and less on Abbott this week.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (24 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> A definite change in tone on Insiders this week. They've finally given up hope of any life from the decaying corpse that is the current Labor government.
> 
> Inetersting final tip as well. Internal polling (union I think it was) has primary Labor support in the NSW seat of Lindsay at 20%.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Lindsay






Miss Hale said:


> Yes, I thought that too Dr Smith, definitely a change in tone and more focus on Labor and the Greens and less on Abbott this week.




It's too late for me.

They have lost me as a viewer for too much blatant pro ALP and anti Coalition propaganda.

gg


----------



## noco (24 February 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's too late for me.
> 
> They have lost me as a viewer for too much blatant pro ALP and anti Coalition propaganda.
> 
> gg




+ 1 GG. I should imagine there will be lots of ethnic cleansing after the election.


----------



## drsmith (24 February 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Yes, I thought that too Dr Smith, definitely a change in tone and more focus on Labor and the Greens and less on Abbott this week.



One other thing I noticed was that Barry Cassidy was much tougher on Adam Bandt this week than he was on Greg Combet last week.

I hope from now on, he's more like that when when there's a Labor minister sitting opposite.



noco said:


> + 1 GG. I should imagine there will be lots of ethnic cleansing after the election.




Perhaps Barry Cassidy has decided he's not ready to retire with the election of a Coalition government.


----------



## Logique (5 March 2013)

Channel surfing last night. I happened upon Lateline, and Emma Alberici's interview of the Liverpoool (western Sydney) local government Mayor.

Interview is a generous description. The poor guy was ambushed with a fusillade of questions, trying to get him to say something to embarass Scott Morrison. "..Do Liverpool people _want_ to be advised whenever asylum seekers are moved in...but do you think that's what they _want_..."

Consistent with Emma having been backgrounded on ALP tactics. 

Bullying a local government Mayor, who to his credit was onto her and gave her nothing.


----------



## orr (5 March 2013)

But not a word of course concerning 4Corners expose of the fraudulently operating property management trusts (straw poll the voting intentions of their management) that both political Majors approach with such timidity, because I'll suggest the bulk of the plebeian electorate are so happily distracted by dieting fat people, talentless dancers, how not to burn sausage rolls in your newly purchased  designer kitchen and <.004% crime rate among released imagration detainee's.  Maintain Your Mediocrity team.


----------



## noco (5 March 2013)

I watched  the ABC news this morning and the ABC gave Gillard 15 minutes free time and it all about ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT.

I finally switched over to AM Agenda at 7.30am and there she was again beiing given free time for 15 minutes on 601  Austar.Yes and the same BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

It is not a wonder to me Gillard does not have a constant headache from all the SPIN  she spits out from under that long nose of hers.


----------



## dutchie (5 March 2013)

orr said:


> But not a word of course concerning 4Corners expose of the fraudulently operating property management trusts (straw poll the voting intentions of their management) that both political Majors approach with such timidity, because I'll suggest the bulk of the plebeian electorate are so happily distracted by dieting fat people, talentless dancers, how not to burn sausage rolls in your newly purchased  designer kitchen and <.004% crime rate among released imagration detainee's.  Maintain Your Mediocrity team.




Good point orr.

This type of fraudulent behaviour has been going on for ages.
There must be a better way to regulate these type of investment vehicles.

It seems that no matter how many times these schemes are shown to be dodgy that there are always new suckers.
Maybe there should be more education - possibly at high school (as if they have not got enough to teach )
Perhaps a small compulsory course in year 10 for money management.
Incomes, wages, tax, super, shares, properties, loans, scams, banking. Not in depth but a general look at money matters.


----------



## Aussiejeff (5 March 2013)

noco said:


> I watched  the ABC news this morning and the ABC gave Gillard 15 minutes free time and it all about ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT.
> 
> I finally switched over to AM Agenda at 7.30am and there she was again beiing given free time for 15 minutes on 601  Austar.Yes and the same BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
> 
> It is not a wonder to me Gillard does not have a constant headache from all the SPIN  she spits out from under that long nose of hers.




Haw, haw, haw...... looks like the West Sydney mob have had a gut-full of JuLiar Blowhard already - poll below shows only 13% give her a toss....

How many days to go of this sickening charade....?? 



> *VOTERS in Sydney's west would rather have Kevin Rudd as prime minister than Julia Gillard, but Tony Abbott remains their top choice, a poll shows.*
> 
> The Seven News/ReachTEL poll found Mr Rudd has a clear lead over Ms Gillard as the preferred prime minister - 74.5 per cent to 25.5 per cent - if voters are forced to choose between the two.
> 
> ...



Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-new...ll/story-fncynjr2-1226590352393#ixzz2McLofElo


----------



## orr (5 March 2013)

dutchie said:


> Good point orr.
> 
> This type of fraudulent behaviour has been going on for ages.
> There must be a better way to regulate these type of investment vehicles.
> ...




What we know as ASIC here has its British equivalent as Seroius Fraud Office and it's not without good reason the Private Eye mag refers to it as the Serious Farce Office. Some of those done over by the Property Trust operations exampled last night were not neophytes to the financial system. What is needed is a brace of these shonks doing some hard time in the can, nothing puts the wobblies up the white collar mob like the bum factory. 

The ABC has a long history of good work in digging and attempting to bring the deliberately camouflaged into view,
BackGround Briefing did a fantastic programme in early 2007 on the supposedly AAA rated securities NSW Councils were buying, if only I'd realised the full import of what was exposed by that program


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 March 2013)

orr said:


> But not a word of course concerning 4Corners expose of the fraudulently operating property management trusts (straw poll the voting intentions of their management) that both political Majors approach with such timidity, because I'll suggest the bulk of the plebeian electorate are so happily distracted by dieting fat people, talentless dancers, how not to burn sausage rolls in your newly purchased  designer kitchen and <.004% crime rate among released imagration detainee's.  Maintain Your Mediocrity team.






dutchie said:


> Good point orr.
> 
> This type of fraudulent behaviour has been going on for ages.
> There must be a better way to regulate these type of investment vehicles.
> ...






orr said:


> What we know as ASIC here has its British equivalent as Seroius Fraud Office and it's not without good reason the Private Eye mag refers to it as the Serious Farce Office. Some of those done over by the Property Trust operations exampled last night were not neophytes to the financial system. What is needed is a brace of these shonks doing some hard time in the can, nothing puts the wobblies up the white collar mob like the bum factory.
> 
> The ABC has a long history of good work in digging and attempting to bring the deliberately camouflaged into view,
> BackGround Briefing did a fantastic programme in early 2007 on the supposedly AAA rated securities NSW Councils were buying, if only I'd realised the full import of what was exposed by that program




I totally agree with you orr and dutchie.

This is the type of programme a national broadcaster should be doing, without fear or favour.

Three cheers to Kerry O'Brien and all the 4Corners team for a magnificent and clinical dissection of bandit mortgage funds.

gg


----------



## Julia (5 March 2013)

There have been many similar programs over the years.  They do not seem to have stopped people putting their money into dodgy investments.


----------



## banco (5 March 2013)

Four Corners has done a lot of good over the years.  Nailed the corrupt Joh Government in Queensland with moonlight state.


----------



## Logique (6 March 2013)

orr said:


> But not a word of course concerning 4Corners expose of the fraudulently operating property management trusts..



This was a good program. We await a similar forensic analysis of the climate change industry. Could be a long wait.


----------



## Julia (6 March 2013)

Logique said:


> This was a good program. We await a similar forensic analysis of the climate change industry. Could be a long wait.



+1.


----------



## Julia (11 March 2013)

This thread has largely been to do with the ABC's bias toward Labor.

I've only watched the first half of tonight's Four Corners program about the influence of Eddie Obeid, but it has spared nothing in exposing the role of this family.

For me, it's hats off to Four Corners for what seems to be a pretty objective and forensic analysis.


----------



## MrBurns (11 March 2013)

Julia said:


> This thread has largely been to do with the ABC's bias toward Labor.
> 
> I've only watched the first half of tonight's Four Corners program about the influence of Eddie Obeid, but it has spared nothing in exposing the role of this family.
> 
> For me, it's hats off to Four Corners for what seems to be a pretty objective and forensic analysis.




It was a good programe Julia, NSW Labor are almost beyond belief, I felt a little sick watching it.

Then I think of Federal Labor and it wouldnt suprise me if it was just as bad.


----------



## banco (11 March 2013)

Julia said:


> This thread has largely been to do with the ABC's bias toward Labor.
> 
> I've only watched the first half of tonight's Four Corners program about the influence of Eddie Obeid, but it has spared nothing in exposing the role of this family.
> 
> For me, it's hats off to Four Corners for what seems to be a pretty objective and forensic analysis.




Not to get too conspiratorial or read too much into things but the ABC institutionally has always been wary of the right faction of the labor party (obeid and friends).  One reason they treat Saint John Faulkner with such reverence is that he's a doyen of the left faction.


----------



## chops_a_must (11 March 2013)

banco said:


> Not to get too conspiratorial or read too much into things but the ABC institutionally has always been wary of the right faction of the labor party (obeid and friends).  One reason they treat Saint John Faulkner with such reverence is that he's a doyen of the left faction.




Well, both right factions of the major parties have some pretty ordinary histories.

I just don't understand why we're so beholden to NSW politics federally.

It's just tapped.


----------



## Calliope (17 March 2013)

The Insiders program was a stacked deck this morning. The guest, Barrie Cassidy, and two of the panel considered the reaction to Conroy's bill for regulating the media was hysterical.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 March 2013)

banco said:


> Not to get too conspiratorial or read too much into things but the ABC institutionally has always been wary of the right faction of the labor party (obeid and friends).  One reason they treat Saint John Faulkner with such reverence is that he's a doyen of the left faction.




John Faulkner and Ian MacDonald have traditionally been treated with reverence by the ABC because of their Left credentials in NSW Labor.

The ABC came quite late to Ian MacDonald's skullduggery.



Calliope said:


> The Insiders program was a stacked deck this morning. The guest, Barrie Cassidy, and two of the panel considered the reaction to Conroy's bill for regulating the media was hysterical.




Calliope, just don't watch it. It is a Left Show.

gg


----------



## Miss Hale (17 March 2013)

Calliope said:


> The Insiders program was a stacked deck this morning. The guest, Barrie Cassidy, and two of the panel considered the reaction to Conroy's bill for regulating the media was hysterical.




I know!!  And I suspect that they thought Piers' reaction was ...hysterical   When will they wake up? 

By the way did anyone else hear anything about the Quill Awards?  Something run by the Melbourne Press Club, the ABC pretty much scooped the pool.  The most surprising award for me was the best column/blog which was won by Barry Cassidy!  Firstly, I didn't know he even wrote a column/blog and, secondly, surely Andrew Bolt has the best column/blog going around if number of readers/participants are any guide.  I think these awards were just another lefty lovefest 

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2013/03/quill-awards-2013-winners.html


----------



## Calliope (17 March 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Calliope, just don't watch it. It is a Left Show.gg




I disagree GG. I think it is important to know your enemies.  Conroy and Cassidy certainly are enemies of freedom of the press.  Cassidy and two of his press gallery mates (Malcolm Farr and the inevitable leftish female journalist)) heckled and tried to ridicule Piers Akerman, the guy from the Daily Telegraph, which had the temerity to depict Conroy as a dictatorial fool.


----------



## Miss Hale (17 March 2013)

Calliope said:


> I disagree GG. I think it is important to know your enemies.  Conroy and Cassidy certainly are enemies of freedom of the press.  Cassidy and two of his press gallery mates (Malcolm Farr and the inevitable leftish female journalist)) heckled and tried to ridicule Piers Akerman, the guy from the Daily Telegraph, which had the temerity to depict Conroy as a dictatorial fool.




I agree.  Although I did wonder when I was shouting at my telly this morning if it was the best way to start my Sunday.


----------



## Logique (17 March 2013)

If the Tele replaced Conroy's image on that front page with John Howard, you wouldn't hear a peep out of the Left. They are MIA on the Conroy Bill.


----------



## Julia (17 March 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> I agree.  Although I did wonder when I was shouting at my telly this morning if it was the best way to start my Sunday.



Which is why I no longer watch it.  Just get too annoyed.  Q & A is only marginally better.


----------



## drsmith (17 March 2013)

The Youtube video is up,


----------



## drsmith (17 March 2013)

Upon listening to that, I can understand why Janet Albrechtsen declined to be a regular on Insiders.


----------



## Julia (17 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> Upon listening to that, I can understand why Janet Albrechtsen declined to be a regular on Insiders.



+1.  The derision and mockery directed, amongst peals of laughter, at Piers Akerman (who can be a bit of a prat at times but with whom I agree on this) is just rude.  Cassidy should be sacked on the basis of his overt bias.


----------



## Miss Hale (18 March 2013)

Julia said:


> +1.  The derision and mockery directed, amongst peals of laughter, at Piers Akerman (who can be a bit of a prat at times but with whom I agree on this) is just rude.  Cassidy should be sacked on the basis of his overt bias.




Sacked?  When he's just won a Quill Award? More likely he will be promoted.  Let's face it, the Insiders team is so far up their own you know what they wouldn't recognise objectivity if it hit them in the face.



> The ABC has dominated the TV winners at the 2013 Quill Awards last night.
> 
> *Best Columnist/Blogger*
> Barrie Cassidy
> The Drum, ABC Online




http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2013/03/quill-awards-2013-winners.html


----------



## chiff (18 March 2013)

Is it a truism to say that bias is in the eye of beholder?


----------



## drsmith (18 March 2013)

chiff said:


> Is it a truism to say that bias is in the eye of beholder?




I saw this in the Fairfax press this morning, highlighted as a featured comment,



> History will judge Julia Gillard as one of the greatest Prime MInisters ever in the way she has driven momentum for Australia's future - recognising the need for action on climate change, building a new infrastructure for the commerce of the 21st century, saving countless numbers of jobs during the uncertainty of the Global Financial crisis (every country that embraced Hoover-like austerity is in deep crisis now), reworking education and recognising the need to bring our disabled out of the shadows so that they contribute fully to our society and to release their carers so that they too can contribute more fully to society.
> 
> People who cannot see the present through the miasma of lies and misrepresentations of Abbott and his bosses can hardly claim to see the future with any accuracy.
> 
> CommenterWhyalla WipeoutLocationDate and timeMarch 18, 2013, 11:17AM




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/the-pulse-live/politics-live-march-18-2013-20130318-2g9nf.html


----------



## chiff (18 March 2013)

Was that editorial comment? Or was it just an obscure opinion meant  to provoke.Why take it on board?I find it better to try to let things like that go thru to the keeper..and not pass any judgement.
The newspaper would say that they canvas and express a range of views....many just to provoke a reaction.
And how people react is probably in direct proportion to their bias.


----------



## drsmith (18 March 2013)

chiff said:


> Was that editorial comment? Or was it just an obscure opinion meant  to provoke.



The same question can be asked about the heckling of Piers Akerman on Insiders on Sunday.


----------



## chiff (18 March 2013)

I just watched  that Akerman video for the first time.It seems Akerman is his own worst enemy for indulging in exaggeration and irrational comparisons.The world is not going to end.I see Malcolm Farr having a laugh.Are Akerman and him from the same stable?Probably a little FBC there-my guess.
But why worry about it? And why worry what the view of some obscure group from Whyalla is.


----------



## MrBurns (18 March 2013)

chiff said:


> I just watched  that Akerman video for the first time.It seems Akerman is his own worst enemy for indulging in exaggeration and irrational comparisons.The world is not going to end.I see Malcolm Farr having a laugh.Are Akerman and him from the same stable?Probably a little FBC there-my guess.
> But why worry about it? And why worry what the view of some obscure group from Whyalla is.




Akerman knows when his industry is under threat.
I wouldn't try to second guess him if I were you.


----------



## IFocus (18 March 2013)

chiff said:


> I just watched  that Akerman video for the first time.It seems Akerman is his own worst enemy for indulging in exaggeration and irrational comparisons.The world is not going to end.I see Malcolm Farr having a laugh.Are Akerman and him from the same stable?Probably a little FBC there-my guess.
> But why worry about it? And why worry what the view of some obscure group from Whyalla is.




Akerman was over top as usual, Karen Middleton was the one making sense-able comment about the lack of detail surrounding the issue.

The right wont be happy until there is only one owner of Australian media, now thats a threat to freedom of speech.

Malcolm Farr BTW is excellent also.


----------



## drsmith (18 March 2013)

chiff said:


> But why worry about it? And why worry what the view of some obscure group from Whyalla is.



With reference to bias, I never said I was worried about it. The point was that a lot of political commentary is biased, including on average, my own. Most people are biased in their political views, the same as most people are biased about their driving ability.



chiff said:


> I just watched  that Akerman video for the first time.It seems Akerman is his own worst enemy for indulging in exaggeration and irrational comparisons.The world is not going to end.I see Malcolm Farr having a laugh.Are Akerman and him from the same stable?Probably a little FBC there-my guess.




On the topic of exaggeration, where in that video clip did Akerman say the world was going to end ?

I saw Karen and Barrie (to a lesser extent) provoking Piers Akerman into an emotional response. Barrie though understood what Piers was saying and became more serious about his points as the interview went on. 

According to Piers, the regulator becomes answerable to the government. Did Barrie challenge that point ?


----------



## Calliope (18 March 2013)

Barrie's _modus operandi_ is to line up two members of the Canberra press gallery (in this case Farr and Middleton) against a conservative outsider. As I've said before it's a stacked deck.


----------



## drsmith (18 March 2013)

Calliope said:


> Barrie's _modus operandi_ is to line up two members of the Canberra press gallery (in this case Farr and Middleton) against a conservative outsider. As I've said before it's a stacked deck.



I don't know why Niki Savva bothers when David Marr in on, but she is able to put him in his place with grace.


----------



## chiff (19 March 2013)

Because we disagree with a view does not make that view bias.
I know what my own biases are and try to compensate for them-always trying not to take myself too seriously.


----------



## Calliope (19 March 2013)

chiff said:


> I know what my own biases are and try to compensate for them-always trying not to take myself too seriously.




Nor expect anyone else to take your views seriously.


----------



## IFocus (23 March 2013)

> *An Essential poll released this week* showed that only 34 per cent of respondents expressed trust in Federal Parliament - 8 percentage points higher than last year. Given Gillard has been battling both internal and external challenges to the legitimacy of her government and her very legitimacy as leader, it's interesting the figure is as high as that. And only 12 per cent said they trusted political parties - the institutions that select our candidates for political office.
> 
> Newspapers were trusted by only 30 per cent, television news the same and online news media by just 27 per cent. (*The ABC was a standout exception, trusted by 70 per cent of respondents, an 11 percentage point increase on last year).
> *



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...s-go-to-war-20130322-2gl96.html#ixzz2OJHlqkmA


The poll went on to say the 30% who didn't trust the ABC were mainly members of ASF


----------



## sails (23 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...s-go-to-war-20130322-2gl96.html#ixzz2OJHlqkmA
> 
> 
> The poll went on to say the 30% who didn't trust the ABC were mainly members of ASF




IF - does it say that 70% trust the* political* content of the ABC? 

Methinks you are, once again, cherry picking to suit your propaganda.  Oh, and it's not only ASF - your head is clearly way too much in the sand ..


EDIT: here's the link to the actual poll - it doesn't mention political content in regard to the ABC.  Why try to deceive, IF???


----------



## dutchie (23 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...s-go-to-war-20130322-2gl96.html#ixzz2OJHlqkmA
> 
> "The ABC was a standout exception, trusted by 70 per cent of respondents, an 11 percentage point increase on last year)."
> 
> ...




It can't be much of a poll if 30% of respondents were from ASF - we are way too biased!


----------



## drsmith (23 March 2013)

dutchie said:


> It can't be much of a poll if 30% of respondents were from ASF - we are way too biased!



I Thought we all watched Bolt.


----------



## Miss Hale (23 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...s-go-to-war-20130322-2gl96.html#ixzz2OJHlqkmA
> 
> 
> The poll went on to say the 30% who didn't trust the ABC were mainly members of ASF




Trusted by 70% but only watched by the 10% that is the leftist intelligentsia


----------



## IFocus (23 March 2013)

Looking forward to Insiders tomorrow for some real low down on the past week the only program that will do any serious analysis from actual insiders not paid flunkies.


----------



## Duckman#72 (23 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Looking forward to Insiders tomorrow for some real low down on the past week the only program that will do any serious analysis from actual insiders not paid flunkies.




Hi IFocus

When you say "actual insiders" I am assuming you mean,  actual union members, actual members of the labor party, actual members of the greens, and actual journalists of the Fairfax press. Any opinions coming from outside the rarified air of this highly regarded sphere would have to be "paid flunkies".:

Duckman


----------



## sails (23 March 2013)

Duckman#72 said:


> Hi IFocus
> 
> When you say "actual insiders" I am assuming you mean,  actual union members, actual members of the labor party, actual members of the greens, and actual journalists of the Fairfax press. Any opinions coming from outside the rarified air of this highly regarded sphere would have to be "paid flunkies".:
> 
> Duckman




And I'm sure the "actual insiders" will happily trot out the party propaganda as IFocus does...


----------



## moXJO (23 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Looking forward to Insiders tomorrow for some real low down on the past week the only program that will do any serious analysis from actual insiders not paid flunkies.




Thats a joke right?
Insiders is labor cheerleading dribble. This is the program that had it's head so far up Rudds a$$ spruiking  him as the next Jesus, even when it was plain to see he was a total failure.


----------



## drsmith (23 March 2013)

moXJO said:


> This is the program that had it's head so far up Rudds a$$ spruiking him as the next Jesus, even when it was plain to see he was a total failure.



They'll have to settle for Julia as their next Jesus now.


----------



## Aussiejeff (24 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> They'll have to settle for Julia as their next Jesus now.




I think you mis-spelt JuLiar.....

Not sure the latest Galaxy poll sees She as a Messiah. More like a Messuppa...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (24 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> Looking forward to Insiders tomorrow for some real low down on the past week the only program that will do any serious analysis from actual insiders not paid flunkies.




Barrie Cassidy is a left wing ALP warrior.

Even if they had 3 middle of the road panellists and interviewed a Liberal frontbencher, I wouldn't watch it.

ABC is politically to the left.

ABC Insiders, even more so.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (24 March 2013)

The ABC ....fair dinkum

This is the second time they've used the words "voter unease" to describe the utter disgust the public feel toward that woman and her lapdogs.



> Anthony Albanese rejects suggestions he should be the next cabinet minister to stand down after a failed Labor coup, as a poll reveals voter unease with the leadership instability




Voter "unease"??? sugar coat it why don't you


----------



## drsmith (24 March 2013)

Watching the second half of Insiders, I didn't think it was to too bad. I'll be kind to Barrie Cassidy today and suggest he was playing devils advocate with some of the points he raised in response to the panellists. 

 I was also a little curious as to the background behind some of the other issues during the week because I hadn't really followed them.

One notable exception though was the question time footage of Julia Gillard second misogyny moment. The full exchange between the PM and the speaker which led to the PM withdrawing without qualification wasn't shown.


----------



## IFocus (24 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> Watching the second half of Insiders, I didn't think it was to too bad. I'll be kind to Barrie Cassidy today and suggest he was playing devils advocate with some of the points he raised in response to the panellists.
> 
> I was also a little curious as to the background behind some of the other issues during the week because I hadn't really followed them.
> 
> One notable exception though was the question time footage of Julia Gillard second misogyny moment. The full exchange between the PM and the speaker which led to the PM withdrawing without qualification wasn't shown.





The rest is here if you weren't aware http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/

I didn't see any notable change in the program other than the usual robust examination of the week in politics by the usual very experienced commentators not paid flunkies.


----------



## drsmith (24 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> The rest is here if you weren't aware http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/



That also does not show the PM's unconditional withdrawal after further prompting from the speaker.

It's the same as the cut-off coverage I saw on ABC2.


----------



## MrBurns (24 March 2013)

ABC News no mention of the Galaxy poll


----------



## MrBurns (25 March 2013)

ABC web site closes comment on this after only 4 posts..............all negative

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-25/julia-gillard-announces-cabinet-reshuffle/4592338#comments


----------



## MrBurns (25 March 2013)

Leigh Sales was excellent tonight interviewing Gillard, I think Gillard is going a bit troppo, she was quite manic when saying she's the leader to take Australia forward, it looked like she believed it


----------



## drsmith (25 March 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Leigh Sales was excellent tonight interviewing Gillard, I think Gillard is going a bit troppo, she was quite manic when saying she's the leader to take Australia forward, it looked like she believed it



I can't wait to see it.

To quote a poster on Michael Smith's blog, "Sales ripped Gillard apart".


----------



## MrBurns (25 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> I can't wait to see it.
> 
> To quote a poster on Michael Smith's blog, "Sales ripped Gillard apart".




She did, I was very impressed, you'll love it.


----------



## Julia (25 March 2013)

Yep, 10 out of 10 to Leigh Sales for her effort this evening.  She was going uphill all the way, with Ms Gillard determined to just steam roller over Sales' legitimate questions.

I might be wrong, but I think the interview will further cement already entrenched views about Gillard.  Those who for some unfathomable reason still think she's the right person to lead the country will pronounce themselves impressed by her 'toughness' and 'determination'.

The rest of us will see someone determined to gloss over all the dysfunction and insist, via her quite incredible level of self belief, that she is the Prime Minister the country needs.

September seems a long time away.


----------



## drsmith (26 March 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She did, I was very impressed, you'll love it.



You could almost see the fake smile draining away from Julia Gillard's face as it went on.

If our PM was given a strong green of tint, it would have been perfect.


----------



## dutchie (26 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> You could almost see the fake smile draining away from Julia Gillard's face as it went on.
> 
> If our PM was given a strong green of tint, it would have been perfect.




It really showed how delusional Gillard is.

Its all about moi, moi, moi.


----------



## dutchie (26 March 2013)

JULIA GILLARD: Well, I’m not agreeing with your list, Leigh… 

That statement is the crux of Julia's (and Labor's) problems.


----------



## Logique (26 March 2013)

Link anyone?

We do at times criticize Leigh Sales, so let's be fair and acknowledge her here.


----------



## dutchie (26 March 2013)

Logique said:


> Link anyone?
> 
> We do at times criticize Leigh Sales, so let's be fair and acknowledge her here.




http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3723476.htm


Yes she did a good job last night.

Pity the same standard of scrutiny was not there 5 years ago. Might have saved Labor from oblivion.


----------



## Calliope (26 March 2013)

dutchie said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3723476.htm
> 
> 
> Yes she did a good job last night.
> ...




It was good to see that reptilian pair displaying how much they loathed each other. Leigh Sales is now straining at the leash to have another go at Tony Abbott. Perhaps last night's efforts were to lull him into a false sense of security to entice him back.


----------



## IFocus (26 March 2013)

You lot really make me want to throw up seriously, ABC beats up Abbott and its ABC bias, beats up Gillard and they are doing a great job.

Really?


----------



## MrBurns (26 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> You lot really make me want to throw up seriously, ABC beats up Abbott and its ABC bias, beats up Gillard and they are doing a great job.
> 
> Really?




You're finally getting the picture


----------



## dutchie (26 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> You lot really make me want to throw up seriously, ABC beats up Abbott and its ABC bias, beats up Gillard and they are doing a great job.
> 
> Really?




Really.

Its been the other way round for 5 years - what do you expect??


----------



## sails (26 March 2013)

IFocus said:


> You lot really make me want to throw up seriously, ABC beats up Abbott and its ABC bias, beats up Gillard and they are doing a great job.
> 
> Really?





lol - and we have been throwing up at the bias we see on the ABC political programs for a long time.  No wonder there is some jubilation that Leigh Sales finally gave Gillard a little of what she has dished out to Abbott.  If the ABC always gave the same grilling to both sides, you would not see this jubilation now.

I think you underestimate the anger of voters out there whose taxes pay for the ABC.  Maybe take a look at the latest polls to see how angry they are getting.


----------



## Julia (26 March 2013)

It does rather seem that 7.30 has decided to sock it to the government at long last, viz tonight's item on the unprecedented number of boat arrivals, which was extremely critical of the government.

But there's a need for balance.  However much I might detest Ms Gillard, she is prepared to front up for interview.  Imo Tony Abbott needs to do the same on 7.30 or other programs that are not his natural allies such as 2GB and The Bolt Report.

Yes, the Coalition is doing very well in the polls at present, but this seems to me like just a default as a result of the odious standing of the government, rather than votes going to Mr Abbott as a result of anything positive he is doing.

As Calliope has earlier commented, Mr Abbott needs to show some courage in exposing himself to questioning, rather than being absolutely passive as at present.


----------



## wayneL (26 March 2013)

Julia said:


> It does rather seem that 7.30 has decided to sock it to the government at long last, viz tonight's item on the unprecedented number of boat arrivals, which was extremely critical of the government.
> 
> But there's a need for balance.  However much I might detest Ms Gillard, she is prepared to front up for interview.  Imo Tony Abbott needs to do the same on 7.30 or other programs that are not his natural allies such as 2GB and The Bolt Report.
> 
> ...




Perhaps the Hewson experience is still too fresh... elections are lost, not won.


----------



## Duckman#72 (26 March 2013)

Julia said:


> But there's a need for balance.  However much I might detest Ms Gillard, she is prepared to front up for interview.  Imo Tony Abbott needs to do the same on 7.30 or other programs that are not his natural allies such as 2GB and The Bolt Report..




And the ABC is doing its best to remind everyone that he doesn't like being interviewed. Did you notice the dig by Sales at the end of the Gillard about the invite to Abbott and that the request was "being considered". Considering the "week that was" as Gillard put it, had nothing to do with the Coalition or Abbott, I thought it was either very thoughtful of the abc to try and get Abbott's comments, or very mischievous.:

Duckman


----------



## sails (26 March 2013)

Julia said:


> ..But there's a need for balance.  However much I might detest Ms Gillard, she is prepared to front up for interview.  Imo Tony Abbott needs to do the same on 7.30 or other programs that are not his natural allies such as 2GB and The Bolt Report....




And Gillard needs to front up to the Bolt Report and 2GB - she has NEVER appeared on the Bolt Report despite apparently being asked - as have many of the alp ministers (so I understand).

So, to be fair, if Abbott has to front up to the normally labor biased ABC, Gillard should also be expected to do likewise to Bolt and 2GB.  If not, there I see no reason Abbott has to be the only one to face a potentially hostile interviewer.


----------



## sails (26 March 2013)

Duckman#72 said:


> And the ABC is doing its best to remind everyone that he doesn't like being interviewed. Did you notice the dig by Sales at the end of the Gillard about the invite to Abbott and that the request was "being considered". Considering the "week that was" as Gillard put it, had nothing to do with the Coalition or Abbott, I thought it was either very thoughtful of the abc to try and get Abbott's comments, or very mischievous.:
> 
> Duckman





LOL - and I don't think Gillard even considers any requests to appear on the Bolt report.  It is possible the interview was no more than to try and guilt Abbott into being pulled apart by Sales.  Perhaps he should only agree if Gillard first fronts up on Bolts show.  She would have to go first as she has shown she cannot be trust to keep her word.


----------



## Calliope (27 March 2013)

sails said:


> And Gillard needs to front up to the Bolt Report and 2GB - she has NEVER appeared on the Bolt Report despite apparently being asked - as have many of the alp ministers (so I understand).
> 
> So, to be fair, if Abbott has to front up to the normally labor biased ABC, Gillard should also be expected to do likewise to Bolt and 2GB.  If not, there I see no reason Abbott has to be the only one to face a potentially hostile interviewer.




The Bolt report is just as biased as the 7.30 report. If Leigh Sales offers Abbott an opportunity to rebut anything that Gillard says I can see no reason why he should not accept, unless of course that he knows that he doesn't have the ticker to face her. Sooner or later he will have to come to grips with having to face up to a hostile interviewer.


----------



## drsmith (27 March 2013)

The PM wasn't too happy with Leigh Sales's style of questioning on Monday night judging her dig at it on ABC radio (Perth) a moment ago.


----------



## Julia (27 March 2013)

What did she say?


----------



## Julia (27 March 2013)

sails said:


> So, to be fair, if Abbott has to front up to the normally labor biased ABC, Gillard should also be expected to do likewise to Bolt and 2GB.  If not, there I see no reason Abbott has to be the only one to face a potentially hostile interviewer.



That's fair enough.  I must admit I've never seen the Bolt Report.
I wouldn't have thought it carried the same cachet as "7.30".

As a voter, I want to see all politicians aspiring to important positions asked to respond to difficult questions.

For what that's worth, though, given the capacity to offer assurances in the election campaign which are easily discarded on election.


----------



## drsmith (27 March 2013)

Julia said:


> What did she say?



It was along the lines of a journalist in a recent interview with her (past few days) promoting the Opposition's line on the government's performance.

If audio or a transcript becomes available from ABC radio 720 Perth, I'll post it.


----------



## MrBurns (27 March 2013)

drsmith said:


> It was along the lines of a journalist in a recent interview with her (past few days) promoting the Opposition's line on the government's performance.
> 
> If audio or a transcript becomes available from ABC radio 720 Perth, I'll post it.




I've decided she's delusional.


----------



## banco (27 March 2013)

Julia said:


> That's fair enough.  I must admit I've never seen the Bolt Report.
> I wouldn't have thought it carried the same cachet as "7.30".




That's an understatement.  Only reason it's on is a to throw Gina Rinehart a bone.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 March 2013)

I saw the Sales/Gillard interview on 7.30.

And on the modern Gillard/Macquarie Dictionary definition of misogyny, I believe the Prime Minister to be guilty of misogyny.

She displayed misogyny towards Ms.Sales in her dismissive attitude towards her questions, which she has not subsequently shown towards the male interviewer Kyle Sandilands, a known misogynist.

gg


----------



## Country Lad (14 April 2013)

I see that Insiders has reverted to form.  I wonder how many times between now and the election they will have 2 conservative and 1 Labor journos on the panel.  I rarely watch it because I prefer more objective and less partisan discussions.  I lasted about 5 minutes today and most of that was the introduction.

Cheers
Country Lad


----------



## Calliope (14 April 2013)

Country Lad said:


> I see that Insiders has reverted to form.  I wonder how many times between now and the election they will have 2 conservative and 1 Labor journos on the panel.  I rarely watch it because I prefer more objective and less partisan discussions.  I lasted about 5 minutes today and most of that was the introduction.




Yes. The format seems to be where the host Barrie Cassidy and two left wing panelists interrupt  and sneeringly talk down the token conservative panelist.

Niki Savvy would be wise to refuse to participate in future.


----------



## drsmith (14 April 2013)

Today's show would have been far better and much more balanced if David Marr's seat was empty.

He was his usual standard of rude.


----------



## MrBurns (14 April 2013)

Damn waste of public money we should tell them so -..........................and I just did. 

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/contact.htm


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

Another good Insiders program today covering a wide range of issues in the usual analytical depth unlike other programs that indulge fluff, paid flunkies and rant vomit but they mainly focused criticism at the government including Marr, probably due to having two conservative commentators (you can tell who they are as they always hold pens).

Thought the coverage of the NBN was accurate for a change (check out the body language between Abbott and Turnbull). 

David Marr as always made a lot of very intelligent contributions left unchanged by the other panellists.

Looking forward as always to next week


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Damn waste of public money we should tell them so -..........................and I just did.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/contact.htm




Thanks for that just sent them high praise of value for money should be more of it.


----------



## drsmith (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> David Marr as always made a lot of very intelligent contributions left unchanged by the other panellists.



He just talks over anyone who doesn't agree with his point of view.

Julia Gillard should call his rudeness towards Niki Savva in particular for what it is.



IFocus said:


> Thanks for that just sent them high praise of value for money should be more of it.




I trust you've also sent them a new credit card and high praise of value for money on immigration policy as well.


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> He just talks over anyone who doesn't agree with his point of view.
> 
> Julia Gillard should call his rudeness towards Niki Savva in particular for what it is.
> 
> ...





I think he just speaks well, I don't necessary agree with Marr but surely you are thinking of Bolt.

What the hell has the insiders got to do with immigration policy?

I enjoy people with a intellectual view of the word right or left middle what ever hate flunkies ranting political agendas which is what exists in commercial media at the moment.

You guys get upset because the ABC wont rant right wing bias like the majority of the current media outlets.


----------



## drsmith (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> I think he just speaks well, I don't necessary agree with Marr but surely you are thinking of Bolt.
> 
> What the hell has the insiders got to do with immigration policy?




It's what he says and how he is rude to others in order to say it that matters. He dominated the conversation today (as he always does) and Barry Cassidy should pull him up for it or not have him on the show. The panel would actually have been balanced had he not been there, and we might have actually had some balanced discussion on immigration policy in his absence. We all know his views on that.



IFocus said:


> I enjoy people with a intellectual view of the word right or left middle what ever hate flunkies ranting political agendas which is what exists in commercial media at the moment.
> 
> You guys get upset because the ABC wont rant right wing bias like the majority of the current media outlets.




Is that a sulk over Labor not getting its media laws up ?


----------



## MrBurns (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> Thanks for that just sent them high praise of value for money should be more of it.




Well that makes one of you


----------



## sails (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> Thanks for that just sent them high praise of value for money should be more of it.




Would you still send them high praise if they had an equal number of both labor and liberal leaning commentators and a host who was clearly neutral?

Media not funded by taxpayers are at liberty to take whatever bias they want and the market sorts them out. Just look at price charts of Newscorp and Fairfax to get help you get the picture.

If the ABC want to be labor's advertising arm in their political content then, imo, they should NOT be funded by taxpayers!


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> *It's what he says and how he is rude to others in order to say it that matters*. He dominated the conversation today (as he always does) and Barry Cassidy should pull him up for it or not have him on the show. The panel would actually have been balanced had he not been there, and we might have actually had some balanced discussion on immigration policy in his absence. We all know his views on that.




You have described  Bolt perfectly.





> Is that a sulk over Labor not getting its media laws up ?




The media laws were watered down rubbish compared to the Brits I didn't see the point.


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

sails said:


> Would you still send them high praise if they had an equal number of both labor and liberal leaning commentators and a host who was clearly neutral?
> 
> Media not funded by taxpayers are at liberty to take whatever bias they want and the market sorts them out. Just look at price charts of Newscorp and Fairfax to get help you get the picture.
> 
> If the ABC want to be labor's advertising arm in their political content then, imo, they should NOT be funded by taxpayers!




You lot are completely hung up on who barracks for which side rather than listening to an analytical intellectual conversation by a group of people who have been federal political press insiders collectively for more than 30 years.

The only organisation in Australia that can be relied on for factual fair coverage is the ABC the rest are just businesses who will say any thing to make a buck which your point reinforces.


----------



## sails (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> You lot are completely hung up on who barracks for which side...





Hmmm... have another look at your reply to drsmith...

Pot, kettle, black???


----------



## sails (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> You have described  Bolt perfectly.....




And Bolt is not paid out of taxpayers funds.

With primary votes down near 30%, surely even the ABC can realise that it would be morally correct and decent to at least remain more neutral in their political content?

Otherwise, they just might risk their taxpayer funding if they keep thumbing their noses at the majority, imo.

Maybe keep the rest of ABC as is, but perhaps the political shows should be self funded with ads.  That would be an interesting exercise...lol


----------



## MrBurns (14 April 2013)

Barrie Cassidy is lucky he hasn't been pulled off the air, his leaning to the left and his support of that lunatic Gillard is out there for all to see. 
Insiders is rubbish as a result.


----------



## noco (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> You have described  Bolt perfectly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Uhmmm. Which show has the highest ratings of viewers?

The Insders comes a very bad second. 

Personally I can't be bothered watching the Imsiders any more.


----------



## IFocus (14 April 2013)

Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia that hasn't a political or business needs agenda.

Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia where you have any hope of getting close to the facts and fair balance.

Any fair minded person reading this thread would absolutely reach that conclusion after reading some of the extreme comments posted.


----------



## MrBurns (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia that hasn't a political or business needs agenda.
> 
> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia where you have any hope of getting close to the facts and fair balance.
> 
> Any fair minded person reading this thread would absolutely reach that conclusion after reading some of the extreme comments posted.




I agree most of the ABC is as you describe.......Insiders definitely is not.


----------



## DB008 (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia where you have any hope of getting close to the facts and fair balance.




ABC still leans to the left. 

The question is, why does it?
Should it?

It is a tax payer funded media outlet, it should be neutral.


----------



## banco (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia that hasn't a political or business needs agenda.
> 
> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia where you have any hope of getting close to the facts and fair balance.
> 
> Any fair minded person reading this thread would absolutely reach that conclusion after reading some of the extreme comments posted.




Depends on the topic. I listen to Radio National a lot and I think they make their position on asylum seekers and gay marriage very clear.


----------



## Julia (14 April 2013)

IFocus said:


> You lot are completely hung up on who barracks for which side rather than listening to an analytical intellectual conversation by a group of people who have been federal political press insiders collectively for more than 30 years.



And who, as a result, have developed a collective 'group think' which prevents them from any objectivity.



> The only organisation in Australia that can be relied on for factual fair coverage is the ABC the rest are just businesses who will say any thing to make a buck which your point reinforces.



Agree re straight News plus most of the radio current affairs programs.  Insiders is the exception on TV plus a few well known for their Left bias on Radio National.



IFocus said:


> Again the ABC is the only media organisation in Australia that hasn't a political or business needs agenda.



They are better than they used to be in this respect, particularly Radio National Breakfast, presumably following intense and sustained protest against their Left bias.



banco said:


> Depends on the topic. I listen to Radio National a lot and I think they make their position on asylum seekers and gay marriage very clear.



They certainly do.  The question is whether they should be so blatantly and obviously pro both subjects when they are funded by the taxpayer to provide objectivity?
What do you think, banco?  Shouldn't they be prepared to offer the "against" point of view also in terms of their charter?


----------



## banco (14 April 2013)

I think if you aggressively tried to make the ABC as politically neutral as possible you'd end up with a much less lively and much more boring station.  It's problematic that they are publicly funded and lean to the left but an organisation that had as it's number one priority neutrality would be boring as bat**** when it came to their political and current affairs coverage.


----------



## sails (14 April 2013)

banco said:


> I think if you aggressively tried to make the ABC as politically neutral as possible you'd end up with a much less lively and much more boring station.  It's problematic that they are publicly funded and lean to the left but an organisation that had as it's number one priority neutrality would be boring as bat**** when it came to their political and current affairs coverage.





Hearing both sides of an argument is far less boring than just being swamped with one side.


----------



## banco (14 April 2013)

sails said:


> Hearing both sides of an argument is far less boring than just being swamped with one side.




If that was the case why does virtually every newspaper lean to either the left or the right?


----------



## Julia (15 April 2013)

banco said:


> I think if you aggressively tried to make the ABC as politically neutral as possible you'd end up with a much less lively and much more boring station.  It's problematic that they are publicly funded and lean to the left but an organisation that had as it's number one priority neutrality would be boring as bat**** when it came to their political and current affairs coverage.



No one is asking for 'neutrality' in the sense of it being boring.  Boring is a result of uninteresting content and delivery.  There's no reason why it's not possible for *balance* to be achieved via providing interesting and well presented content from different points of view.


----------



## sptrawler (17 April 2013)

It was great to hear liegh Sales interview, Warick McKibbin in a curteous manner, even though he wasn't pushing Labors agenda.
Shame it has probably taken public opinion to stop her attack dog mentality.
There is nothing wrong, with allowing an intelligent well informed person, having time to impart their knowledge or ideas.
Far better to do that, than listen to a half baked reporters interjecting and trying to confuse issues with crap.

It would be really nice if reporters could go back to reporting, rather than trying to write or create the headline they want.


----------



## Calliope (29 April 2013)

Huh???


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2013)

Calliope said:


> View attachment 51956
> 
> 
> Huh???




Maybe she meant any mentally balanced labor cheerleaders.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 May 2013)

Unfortunately today the only radio station I could access was ABCNews Radio 

It is a radio station intent on providing ALP apologies and worldwide left opinion from stations such as the BBC and Deutche Welle.

I presume our left ABC skewed news is transmitted on their stations.

The left bias of the ABC is transmitted worldwide.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2013)

Q & A Gillard questioned by school kids, stand by for a staged production of rubbish.


----------



## Julia (6 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Q & A Gillard questioned by school kids, stand by for a staged production of rubbish.



Which would perfectly complement the performance by the odious Joe Ludwig on "7.30" this evening in the wake of the Egyptian animal abuse situation.
How on earth do d***heads like this manage to get into ministerial positions?????


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2013)

Julia said:


> Which would perfectly complement the performance by the odious Joe Ludwig on "7.30" this evening in the wake of the Egyptian animal abuse situation.
> How on earth do d***heads like this manage to get into ministerial positions?????




I often wonder that myself these people are not even close to being acceptable, I dont think people think about their choices when they vote...


----------



## MrBurns (6 May 2013)

Well that was pleasant little love in, what a waste of time with all the real issues she could and should have been grilled on.


----------



## gordon2007 (6 May 2013)

I thought it was a very good episode actually. Hats off to the kids. It pains me to say though that it did make her look like a good pm tonight.


----------



## dutchie (13 May 2013)

ABC endorses the Labor spin and keeps calling it an "uncomfortable" Labor budget.

They might be better off being unbiased and calling it a "typical" Labor budget.


----------



## Knobby22 (13 May 2013)

dutchie said:


> ABC endorses the Labor spin and keeps calling it an "uncomfortable" Labor budget.
> 
> They might be better off being unbiased and calling it a "typical" Labor budget.




The word typical shows bias.


----------



## dutchie (13 May 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> The word typical shows bias.




True, but I am not publicly funded nor do I have a charter saying I will be unbiased.


----------



## dutchie (13 May 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> The word typical shows bias.




The word more accurately describes the real life results to date.


----------



## MrBurns (13 May 2013)

Q and A now Bob Katter is a raving lunatic

Clive Palmer sounds surprisingly good and is a hit with the audience

Bob Katter should be locked up


----------



## Logique (14 May 2013)

I say decentralize the ABC news production studios away from the claustrophobia of the inner city, where the cognoscenti are on a different planet to everyday Australians.    

But I'm happy for quality programs like Classic Breakfast (Classic FM) to be transmitted from anywhere Emma Ayres and Ivan Lloyd would like.


----------



## MrBurns (16 May 2013)

With the ALP in meltdown the ABC web site is following this in the national interest by having as it's lead story 
"Cloning Breakthrough"

Ignoring the demise of your overlords wont make it go away................


----------



## Julia (16 May 2013)

I was pleasantly surprised by Leigh Sales this evening, following Tony Abbott's Budget Reply speech, choosing John Hewson to comment on it.
I'd have expected someone from the Left.  Good to see that at least some parts of the ABC are attempting a different approach.

In complete contrast was a thoroughly nauseating exchange on RN "Breakfast" this morning between Fran Kelly and Paul Bongiorno, almost weeping in sympathy with the Prime Ministers "heartfelt emotional breakdown" in parliament yesterday.  This, of course, followed many replays of the actual 'tearful' Ms Gillard.

Apart from one dedicated Left follower here, and maybe two on another forum, the vast majority of reactions have been absolutely cynical.


----------



## Knobby22 (17 May 2013)

Julia said:


> Apart from one dedicated Left follower here, and maybe two on another forum, the vast majority of reactions have been absolutely cynical.




Yes, so true. It's sad we have all become so cynical, but it is completely justified.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 May 2013)

Julia said:


> I was pleasantly surprised by Leigh Sales this evening, following Tony Abbott's Budget Reply speech, choosing John Hewson to comment on it.
> I'd have expected someone from the Left.  Good to see that at least some parts of the ABC are attempting a different approach.
> 
> In complete contrast was a thoroughly nauseating exchange on RN "Breakfast" this morning between Fran Kelly and Paul Bongiorno, almost weeping in sympathy with the Prime Ministers "heartfelt emotional breakdown" in parliament yesterday.  This, of course, followed many replays of the actual 'tearful' Ms Gillard.
> ...




I would agree totally Julia, it will be imperative on an incoming coalition, should they win, to give serious consideration to the ABC, it's far left stance and the value that ordinary ABC listeners and viewers, and the general population turned off by it's political role receive from it.

It is also a "snooty" organisation, not targetting the ordinary lower income or less well educated or disadvantaged of this nation with any programmes. It is an Orwellian "Big Brother" for The Left. of The Left.

Presently the ABC seems to think it is run for it's own good and not for the public or the nation.

Whether this involves a new charter, mass layoffs , or whatever, something needs to be done.

The ABC and the ALP are not done for yet, though. Together they may still win the election for the latter.

Let us hope not.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (17 May 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, so true. It's sad we have all become so cynical, but it is completely justified.





I think she seriously believes people can be fooled easily, I really do think she's drunk with power and will do anything to retain it , trouble is she hasn't a clue how to do it.


----------



## Logique (17 May 2013)

I'd imagine Kerry O'Brien is warming up the tonsils for election night coverage. "There's another seat lost for the ABC..er.. "

But I think Labor is beyond even the powers of the ABC. So I'd expect a few OMG epiphanies from the announcers and presenters, as they realize that a new broom is just 4 short months away.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 May 2013)

At least Chris Uhlmann is an independent thinker.

A very interesting article.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-17/uhlmann-labor-finds-itself-without-a-homeland-to-defend/4696656

gg


----------



## noco (17 May 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> At least Chris Uhlmann is an independent thinker.
> 
> A very interesting article.
> 
> ...




Who knows, we might see a few more ABC turn coats out to impress the coalition just to retain their jobs


----------



## Julia (17 May 2013)

noco said:


> Who knows, we might see a few more ABC turn coats out to impress the coalition just to retain their jobs



I actually think Chris Urhlman has always been pretty objective in his interviews.

Leigh Sales is better, however.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (18 May 2013)

noco said:


> Who knows, we might see a few more ABC turn coats out to impress the coalition just to retain their jobs






Julia said:


> I actually think Chris Urhlman has always been pretty objective in his interviews.
> 
> Leigh Sales is better, however.




I cannot ever see Leigh Sales or Chris Uhlmann ever out of a job.

Two class acts, able to give it to both sides.

Chris' articles and interviews over the last few years show a depth of perception, groundedness and an intolerance of cant and bull****. 

They are both a light in an otherwise dank left bowl of ABC gruel.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (18 May 2013)

The ABC is doing their level best to promote doubt over Abbotts budget reply, quoting Penny Wong as if she's an expert and not one of the liars and cheats presently in Govt.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-18/dispute-over-coalition-budget-savings-figures/4697744


----------



## Aussiejeff (19 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The ABC is doing their level best to promote doubt over Abbotts budget reply, *quoting Penny Wong as if she's an expert and not one of the liars and cheats presently in Govt.*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-18/dispute-over-coalition-budget-savings-figures/4697744




For some reason, every time Penny opens her trap and starts spouting egonomics, I begin to feel nauseous.. 

Is that so Wong?


----------



## Logique (20 May 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> For some reason, every time Penny opens her trap and starts spouting egonomics, I begin to feel nauseous..
> Is that so Wong?



Wong is one of the most vicious politicians in Australian parliamentary history. And before the gender police come out, I'm no fan of Slipper or Thompson either.

Only 4 months until the re-assertion of free speech - _Anything But Conservative: survey confirms all you suspected about the ABC_: http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...vey_confirms_all_you_suspected_about_the_abc/

ABC staff - Leigh Sales has woken up, what about the rest of you in (for NSW) Ultimo? Seats could be lost for the ABC.

Otherwise known as AWU broadcasting. But I've gone too far there haven't I.


----------



## Some Dude (20 May 2013)

Logique said:


> Only 4 months until the re-assertion of free speech - _Anything But Conservative: survey confirms all you suspected about the ABC_: http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...vey_confirms_all_you_suspected_about_the_abc/




So the assumption was that if someone voted labor, they were biased? Did an equal number of Liberal voters apply for those jobs? Is this a new call for affirmative action for conservative leaning voters to write "biased" articles?

I think we are through the looking glass here. It's amazing what people call bias. Accordingly to Bolt's terminology, most people here at ASF skew "violently" conservative!


----------



## Logique (20 May 2013)

I think it's the opinion forming programs, news and current affairs, including Media Watch-the-conservatives. Where are the conservatives on Insiders, Lateline, aside from road-to-Damascus Leigh Sales, or 7:30.

That's a bit unfair to Leigh Sales who I rate.   

The assumption by the taxpayer-funded inner city broadcaster is, that if you vote Coalition you are biased and misogynist. 

Apologies to Emma Ayres and Ivan Lloyd (Classic FM), I don't mean you.


----------



## Aussiejeff (20 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> So the assumption was that if someone voted labor, they were biased? Did an equal number of Liberal voters apply for those jobs? Is this a new call for affirmative action for conservative leaning voters to write "biased" articles?
> 
> I think we are through the looking glass here. It's amazing what people call bias. Accordingly to Bolt's terminology, *most people here at ASF skew "violently"* conservative!




I think in some shape or form, we are all violently skewered by pollies at some time.....


----------



## Some Dude (20 May 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> I think in some shape or form, we are all violently skewered by pollies at some time.....




LOL.. too true..


----------



## Some Dude (20 May 2013)

Logique said:


> I think it's the opinion forming programs, news and current affairs, including Media Watch-the-conservatives. Where are the conservatives on Insiders, Lateline, aside from road-to-Damascus Leigh Sales, or 7:30.
> 
> That's a bit unfair to Leigh Sales who I rate.
> 
> ...




Problem is that when people do a more comprehensive analysis, your perception doesn't bear out.

Bias it seems, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. If you disagree with someone, it is all too easy to simply say that they are biased.


----------



## Calliope (20 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Problem is that when people do a more comprehensive analysis, your perception doesn't bear out.
> 
> Bias it seems, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. If you disagree with someone, it is all too easy to simply say that they are biased.




The Devil can quote the scripture for his own ends.



> Folker Hanusch, senior lecturer in journalism at University of the Sunshine Coast, on new polling confirming the Leftist bias of the overwhelming majority of journalists:
> 
> "Our survey was conducted by telephone with carefully selected journalists from newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations, online news sites and news agency AAP, as a sample of the 8000 to 10,000 journalists in Australia today.
> 
> ...




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/


----------



## Ves (20 May 2013)

Are you trying to tell us that Andrew Bolt votes Labour?


----------



## Some Dude (20 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> The Devil can quote the scripture for his own ends.




And only people who are spooked by shadows of demons that don't exist are afraid of the truth.

When you work out how to hold a discussion about bias, the nature of statistics, sampling, etc and can hold an actual discussion instead of talking cliches until the cows come home, let me know.

And duncan's horses did turn and eat other...



Let us pray..


----------



## FlyingFox (20 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> And only people who are not spooked by shadows of demons that don't exist are afraid of the truth.
> 
> When you work out how to hold a discussion about bias, the nature of statistics, sampling, etc and can hold an actual discussion instead of talking cliches until the cows come home, let me know.
> 
> ...





+1. Would love to see the correlation of voting intention vs IQ : ...


----------



## banco (20 May 2013)

I honestly don't see how anyone can watch/listen to the ABC and not think they are biased.  They don't leave you in much doubt about their positions on gay marriage and refugees for example.  It's like saying the Australian isn't biased.


----------



## banco (20 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> +1. Would love to see the correlation of voting intention vs IQ : ...




The Greens voters would probably come out ahead.


----------



## Tink (21 May 2013)

banco said:


> I honestly don't see how anyone can watch/listen to the ABC and not think they are biased.  They don't leave you in much doubt about their positions on gay marriage and refugees for example.  It's like saying the Australian isn't biased.




Exactly, you just have to look at their front page, says it all.
They need an overhaul, abit of balance would be good.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> And only people who are *spooked by shadows* of* demons that don't exist *are *afraid of the truth*.
> 
> When you work out how to hold a discussion about bias, the nature of statistics, sampling, etc and can hold an actual discussion instead of talking cliches *until the cows come home*, let me know.




Your posts are all clichÃ©s. When you can post without clichÃ©s let me know.


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

banco said:


> The Greens voters would probably come out ahead.




Greens voters have the highest rate of science degrees per voter.


----------



## sptrawler (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> Greens voters have the highest rate of science degrees per voter.




Well that highlights the sorry state of our education system.


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well that highlights the sorry state of our education system.




Or the disdain that our major parties treat the sciences with.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

banco said:


> I honestly don't see how anyone can watch/listen to the ABC and not think they are biased.  They don't leave you in much doubt about their positions on gay marriage and refugees for example.  It's like saying the Australian isn't biased.




Do you separate disagreement from the perception of bias? Do you associate bias with intent or conspiracy? For balance, should outlets like the ABC have shows supporting conspiracy theories, slavery, racism, etc?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well that highlights the sorry state of our education system.




Maybe not in the way you intend.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> Or the disdain that our major parties treat the sciences with.




Or the general populace at large ...


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Do you separate disagreement from the perception of bias? Do you associate bias with intent or conspiracy?




With the ABC is has to be intent...it couldn't be by chance. To use one of your clichÃ©s, this thread seems to be flushing the greenies out of the closet.



> The survey of 605 journalists from around Australia found that just more than half described themselves as having left political views, while only 13 per cent said they were right of centre.
> 
> *This tendency was most pronounced among the 34 ABC journalists who agreed to declare their voting intention, with 41 per cent of them saying they would vote for the Greens, 32 per cent declaring support for Labor and 14 per cent backing the Coalition.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...abc-survey-finds/story-fn59niix-1226647246897


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> With the ABC is has to be intent...it couldn't be by chance.




Why not?

You should try reading an actual analysis on media slant. Voting intention, especially one where 1/3 refused to specify, is not a great indicator. The result does not support your perception.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Poll on the ABC web site................notice there's no "NO" option, leaving it open ?

Someone should go in there and knock a few heads together................




> Opinion Poll - Have your vote
> 
> 
> Do you think it is likely that an Abbott government would bring back WorkChoices?
> ...


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Poll on the ABC web site................notice there's no "NO" option, leaving it open ?
> 
> Someone should go in there and knock a few heads together................




What is wrong with the available responses?


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Poll on the ABC web site................notice there's no "NO" option, leaving it open ?
> 
> Someone should go in there and knock a few heads together................




It's a perfectly legitimate question.

In surveys with a non-definite answer, you ask for non-definite responses.

For example, a mobility study might ask:

Are you likely to leave place x within the next x years:

Highly likely.
likely
Not sure.
Unlikely
Highly Unlikely.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> It's a perfectly legitimate question.






> Current Poll
> 
> Do you think it is likely that an Abbott government would bring back WorkChoices?
> 
> ...




All is shows is the leftist bias of The Drum readership... and their ignorance.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> All is shows is the leftist bias of The Drum readership... and their ignorance.




When a party is elected that you disagree with generally, do you simply think to yourself that the electorate is biased? Or are you able to separate disagreement from a perception of bias?


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> All is shows is the leftist bias of The Drum readership... and their ignorance.




I think you guys should stop tilting at windmills.

We all know that the only thing us pinko poofter communist types read is the conversation, these days.

Can't even get your target correct.


----------



## McLovin (21 May 2013)

Who cares about polls on websites. Seriously, when did these become the basis for anything except this...


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> When a party is elected that you disagree with generally, do you simply think to yourself that the electorate is biased?




No. Do you?



> are you able to separate disagreement from a perception of bias?




Yes. Can you?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

McLovin said:


> Who cares about polls on websites. Seriously, when did these become the basis for anything except this...




The day real science and analysis didn't support their world view.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> No. Do you?
> 
> Yes. Can you?




No and Yes respectively but your responses are difficult to correlate with your observation about the ABC online poll, namely:



Calliope said:


> All is shows is the leftist bias of The Drum readership... and their ignorance.




It is this labelling of groups as holding a "leftist bias" attribute based on the responses to an issue that highlights the difficulty that people should be aware of when assessing claims of bias in a wider context. Setting aside for the moment sample size, validity of online polling, margins of error, etc., if a similar figure within the wider community believe what is asked in that poll then in fact it is representative of that understanding, be that right or wrong, congruent or not with your opinion. That you disagree or believe that people are wrong would seem to factor into your assessments and thus unfounded accusations of bias.

Currently 61%. Last poll I saw from nearly 12 months ago was similar.



			
				AFR said:
			
		

> Today’s Essential poll shows 53 per cent of voters believe it’s likely Mr Abbott would resurrect the Howard government laws, despite him saying they were “dead, buried and cremated”.




We could now bring in issues such as sample size, validity of online polling, margins of error, etc.?

And did you end up reading the analysis about media slant? It's an interesting read for those with a genuine interest in the topic.


----------



## wayneL (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> The day real science and analysis didn't support their world view.




Oh my! Specks and logs immediatly  come to mind.

I haven't seen a jot of evidence that you have even the remotest understanding of these two concepts.


----------



## Logique (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> I think you guys should stop tilting at windmills.
> We all know that the only thing us pinko poofter communist types read is the conversation, these days.
> Can't even get your target correct.



Bit hard Chops. Calliope was correct to tilt at the Climate Change windmill, and the ALP Surplus windmill. Conservative thought has moved on from your so 1970s.. "..pinko poofter communist.." sloganeering. 

I recall the recent _38 minutes_ footage of Tony Abbott in lively discussion with his gay and beloved sister. An Inconvenient Truth for the Left.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

wayneL said:


> Oh my! Specks and logs immediatly  come to mind.
> 
> I haven't seen a jot of evidence that you have even the remotest understanding of these two concepts.




Let us pray


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> What is wrong with the available responses?




The available options do not give the opportunity to say NO they will not re introduce Work Choices, all available options leave doubt.

Likely 
Unlikely and 
Unsure

are all choices which leave the possibility open.

As all Labor dickheads are always harping on about this as a scare campaign where it's been made perfectly clear over time that it's NOT a possibility I object to the public funded ABC playing that game.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> No and Yes respectively but your responses are *difficult to correlate* with your observation about the ABC online poll, namely:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Who cares? You stick with your biases and I'll stick with mine. I'm sure nobody else gives a stuff. :bad:


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> Who cares? You stick with your biases and I'll stick with mine. I'm sure nobody else gives a stuff. :bad:




Well, that is just it. Discussing these things with people you disagree with and trying to identify how we ascertain how we determine what we believe is true or not only on these matters is something that one would discuss if you care whether what you believe and communicate to others is true or not. By all means, continue as you wish. As will I


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> By all means, continue as you wish. As will I




This should be fun ... (pulls up armchair ...)


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The available options do not give the opportunity to say NO they will not re introduce Work Choices, all available options leave doubt.
> 
> Likely
> Unlikely and
> ...




So, you're saying there is absolute no doubt about these matters?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> This should be fun ... (pulls up armchair ...)




Don't get comfy. It has been my experience here that the vast majority of people are not the slightest bit interested in whether what they believe is true or not.

For the cliche lovers, virtue never tested is no virtue at all.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The available options do not give the opportunity to say NO they will not re introduce Work Choices, all available options leave doubt.
> 
> Likely
> Unlikely and
> ...




That survey is balanced. They have left out yes as well. The fewer option you have, the more likely you are to get statistically significant result from you sampling of a limited population.

e.g If they are given 3 options, you might only need 1000 respondents to say something about trends.
If there are 5 options, you will need 2,500 respondents to say something meaningful about trends etc. 

BTW what are your thoughts about the ABC when over the period of time that the Howard government was in power?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> So, you're saying there is absolute no doubt about these matters?




As it's been denied for years I would say NO.

That question is about as legitimate as  - 

Will Julia Gillard continue to tell lies ?

Likely 
Unlikely
Not sure

each answer indicates it might happen.


----------



## chiff (21 May 2013)

I just voted on the Age website for the best footballer of the last AFL round -each week the player nominated as BOG for each of the eight games is put up for voting.
I voted for Rory Sloane as I know he was the most worthy.How come some Victorian nominee always get the most votes?Usally ,if they win, a Collingwood nominee.
I am sure there is no bias involved from Collingwood supporters or from me,as a Crows supporter.I do not understand these online polls.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> That survey is balanced. They have left out yes as well. The fewer option you have, the more likely you are to get statistically significant result from you sampling of a limited population.




Likely is a good as "yes"



> BTW what are your thoughts about the ABC when over the period of time that the Howard government was in power?




Don't really recall, was busy with other things , the only time we focus on them is when their bias shows beyond reasonable doubt....like now.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The available options do not give the opportunity to say NO they will not re introduce Work Choices, all available options leave doubt.
> 
> Likely
> Unlikely and
> ...




So instead of positing that the person who formulated this survey was someone who believed that politicians can say one thing and then do something else, for which plenty of people on this site believe Julia Gillard did with a Carbon Tax, you assume that there is intent and motive i.e. a game being played and funded by the ABC?

If those responses were made available in a different context, say Julia Gillard and the Carbon Tax, would the survey be playing a game?

Is there any way you could try to test your notion? Have you sent a communication to the ABC asking for the reason they chose only those three options and did breakdown the non-unsure responses?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> That question is about as legitimate as  -
> 
> Will Julia Gillard continue to tell lies ?
> 
> ...




So you're asserting that it is the question that is the problem, not the available choices?


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Likely is a good as "yes"




ergo unlikely is as good as no.



MrBurns said:


> Don't really recall, was busy with other things , the only time we focus on them is when their bias shows beyond reasonable doubt....like now.




their bias or yours?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> So you're asserting that it is the question that is the problem, not the available choices?




It's a provocative and unnecessary question designed to scare and the available answers leave doubt.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> It's a provocative and unnecessary question designed to scare and the available answers leave doubt.




What's wrong with bring provocative? That is what good journalism is right? Well at least used to be. 

It is a legitimate question that many potential liberal voters would like to know about.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> ergo unlikely is as good as no.



 No it isn't, unlikely means probably not but not absolutely not.



> their bias or yours?




Bias by the ABC supporting a proven incompetent Govt with a lying leader, all factual not anyone's opinion, when a broadcaster supports them they lose credibility when that broadcaster is the ABC it's against their charter and possibly illegal.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> What's wrong with bring provocative? That is what good journalism is right? Well at least used to be.




Reassess your understanding of "provocative" in this context. please don't get this," promoting an old scare mongering subject" with good journalism.



> It is a legitimate question that many potential liberal voters would like to know about.




Not legitimate at all, the subject was closed a year or more ago but Labor and their supporters in a desperate attempt to scare people continue to bring it up.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> No it isn't, unlikely means probably not but not absolutely not.




like·ly  (lkl)
adj. like·li·er, like·li·est
1. Possessing or displaying the qualities or characteristics that make something *probable*:

un·like·ly  (n-lkl)
adj. un·like·li·er, un·like·li·est
1. *Not likely; improbable.*


Now do either of these definitions have any notion of absoluteness to them? 



MrBurns said:


> Bias by the ABC supporting a proven incompetent Govt with a lying leader, all factual not anyone's opinion, when a broadcaster supports them they lose credibility when that broadcaster is the ABC it's against their charter and possibly illegal.




Just because they put up a survey to which you didn't like the answers? How many people voting for either party have concerns about work choices? the carbon tax?


Here are two news stories from the ABC wesite

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-25/carbon-tax-cops-blame-for-hip-pocket-pain3a-survey/4593156
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-01/carbon-tax-takes-effect/4102830

If I was a "tree hugging communist hippie" (words form this forum not my description of me) I would think that the ABC is biased against the government just form the titles.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> It's a provocative and unnecessary question designed to scare and the available answers leave doubt.




So you acknowledge then that the available responses are adequate? If not we can keep banging away at that but I feel that your real objection is to the question, the available responses would be irrelevant. Correct?

Moving onto the question. If the majority of the current community believe that it is possible, regardless of what Tony Abbott has said, in what way is it provocative? I don't believe that a question must have majority opinion to be a valid question but I am trying to understand how a question that the majority of the country believes is valid in the affirmative is therefore provocative?

For the record, I don't think Tony Abbott will reintroduce it. I think the coalition both learnt their lesson last time and further, Tony was not an enthusiastic support of work choices to say the least.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Well, that is just it. Discussing these things with people you disagree with and trying to identify how we ascertain how we determine what we believe is true or not only on these matters is something that one would discuss if you care whether what you believe and communicate to others is true or not. By all means, continue as you wish. As will I




What a crock!


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> like·ly  (lkl)
> adj. like·li·er, like·li·est
> 1. Possessing or displaying the qualities or characteristics that make something *probable*:
> 
> ...




Unlikely is defined as improbable not absolutely NO




Some Dude said:


> So you acknowledge then that the available responses are adequate? If not we can keep banging away at that but I feel that your real objection is to the question, the available responses would be irrelevant. Correct?




The answer choices are not adequate as they do not allow for an answer of NO to the question and the question itself it dragging up old rubbish designed to keep it in the headlines for political reasons. There is no validity in the question at all, the fact that people answered it one way or the other is irrelevant.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> What a crock!




Well, thanks for your well thought out and expressed opinion. We will file that with the rest of them shall we


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Unlikely is defined as improbable not absolutely NO




ergo likely is defined as probable not absolutely YES. Again the survey is balanced, there is no bias.  



MrBurns said:


> The answer choices are not adequate as they do not allow for an answer of NO to the question and the question itself it dragging up old rubbish designed to keep it in the headlines for political reasons. There is no validity in the question at all, the fact that people answered it one way or the other is irrelevant.




Yes because you think it is rubbish does not mean the rest of the adult Australian population think so too. If it not relevant to you don't answer it or take note of it.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Well, thanks for your well thought out and expressed opinion.




I'm always happy to prick inflated egos.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> I'm always happy to prick inflated egos.




Read the analysis on media slant yet?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> ergo likely is defined as probable not absolutely YES. Again the survey is balanced, there is no bias.




Likely means more chance of yes than no.

Unlikely means more chance of no than yes but does not rule it out and the Libs ruled it out years ago so once again the question is leading, provocative and based on political motives to stir unease.



> Yes because you think it is rubbish does not mean the rest of the adult Australian population think so too. If it not relevant to you don't answer it or take note of it.




The adult population will answer any question put to them in a survey such as this, the ABC have no business dragging up old bulldust like this to help their socialist overlords.

Why don't we have the question, will this Govt keep any future promises such as "no carbon tax" or will they break them ?

That is a more relevant question to ask rather than one on a subject closed many years ago.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Likely means more chance of yes than no.
> 
> Unlikely means more chance of no than yes but does not rule it out and the Libs ruled it out years ago so once again the question is leading, provocative and based on political motives to stir unease.
> 
> ...






Why should there be a definite no answer? The libs ruled it out at that time. Times change, as do circumstances, very quickly. Unfortunately some of us are stuck in the past...

Journalist should be asking the questions everyone is asking and those that everyone is afraid to ask. Just because it does not agree with your world view, does not make it wrong. We are near a election, its open season ... 

Actually *if you* support the Liberals, you should be more upset about them cancelling the policy than the ABC putting up a survey on it.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> The Devil can quote the scripture for his own ends.
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/




Well looky here. Let's go to the author of the study that Andrew Bolt quoted from.



			
				Folker Hanusch said:
			
		

> It is important to note that there is little research showing that journalists' personal political biases affect their work.
> 
> When asked in this survey about a range of influences on their work, many journalists said their superiors have a much stronger influence than their personal values and beliefs.




And from the comments section:



			
				Folker Hanusch said:
			
		

> It is very difficult to show any link between a journalists' political views and the stories they write. There has been a little bit of research, and it generally suggests that there is little if no link between the two. The thing is that most journalists do not go into the profession with a political intention, so they are then also not necessarily likely to display their conviction in their stories. Opinion/comment pieces may be a different kettle of fish, and they're mostly written by senior journos. The issue is that it would seem even though most rank-and-file journos lean to the left, this may be evened out by the fact their superiors are more likely to be conservative voters. And in a newsroom, it's those senior editors who decide broad news agendas.
> Of course with this kind of research we can only ever go by what journalists tell us - they may indeed be lying, but that's a problem with all surveys, incl. polls.
> I am cautious about the ABC/News Ltd distinctions because the numbers are quite small. So while there is a difference between the two that's statistically significant, I won't be totally confident of the percentages as such - they have a higher sample error. Besides, what is interesting is that journos at all three major organisations have a left bias (News Ltd is actually 66.3% left if you combine Labor and the Greens). Again, though, whether that actually influences the news reporting is another questions.




I assume that you will be more careful about bias affecting the message when assessing messengers of information like Andrew Bolt in future. Won't you?

It only matters if you care about whether what you believe and tell others is true.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Why should there be a definite no answer? The libs ruled it out at that time. Times change, as do circumstances, very quickly. Unfortunately some of us are stuck in the past...
> 
> Journalist should be asking the questions everyone is asking and those that everyone is afraid to ask. Just because it does not agree with your world view, does not make it wrong. We are near a election, its open season ...
> 
> Actually *if you* support the Liberals, you should be more upset about them cancelling the policy than the ABC putting up a survey on it.




Obviously there should be a NO option otherwise it's a question with response choices which leave the possibility open.

Times change ? if the Libs bring it up again fair enough but it's not an issue with them just for the ABC and anyone who sees an opportunity for a scare campaign like that rats nest in the Lodge at present.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Obviously there should be a NO option otherwise it's a question with response choices which leave the possibility open.




My guess is that if a no option (and a yes) option had been given, even more complaints would have been generated by people claiming that the ABC was trying to dilute to response.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Obviously there should be a NO option otherwise it's a question with response choices which leave the possibility open.




Duh! that is usually the point of these surveys, to leave this open. I answered your  question re this in my first post. The survey answers are balanced. Therefore there is no bias. We are going in circles. Your response to this has been that there should be a no, *only because that is how you would like to answer.*

Let me put it to you this way. If the survey asked to answer the question with a points scale with -100 as definitely no and 100 as definitely yes. How many people would answer at -100 and 100? Given a limited sample what can you say about these results?




MrBurns said:


> Times change ? if the Libs bring it up again fair enough but it's not an issue with them just for the ABC and anyone who sees an opportunity for a scare campaign like that rats nest in the Lodge at present.




This is not a scare campaign just because you think it is. It is a legitimate question that many people will ask themselves. Fine you think Julia Gillard is a liar. Why should I believe Tony Abbott then?? Just because he said so? Just because you say so?


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> My guess is that if a no option (and a yes) option had been given, even more complaints would have been generated by people claiming that the ABC was trying to dilute to response.




But that would be science and my god statistics ... we can't have that ... that is for the tree hugging communist hippies. In "my gut feeling" we trust ...


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Duh! that is usually the point of these surveys, to leave this open. I answered your  question re this in my first post. The survey answers are balanced. Therefore there is no bias. We are going in circles. Your response to this has been that there should be a no, *only because that is how you would like to answer.*




Yes you are going round in circles and refuse to see the flaw in asking a question about an issues that was closed 5 years ago and how it is obviously politically motivated.............the public aren't interested at all, the ABC just stirs ****.




> This is not a scare campaign just because you think it is. It is a legitimate question that many people will ask themselves. Fine you think Julia Gillard is a liar. Why should I believe Tony Abbott then?? Just because he said so? Just because you say so?




No it's a scare campaign because it is. 







> a question many people will ask themselves



??? Who ? I don't know anyone who even remembers it in detail.

Julia Gillard is a liar, fact proven, Abbott isn't a liar because you think he might be one day.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Yes you are going round in circles and refuse to see the flaw in asking a question about an issues that was closed 5 years ago and how it is obviously politically motivated.............the public aren't interested at all, the ABC just stirs ****.




But that is demonstratively false. Regular polling has shown that the majority of the public do think it is a valid concern. I disagree with them but I can't agree with your comments here.



MrBurns said:


> No it's a scare campaign because it is. ??? Who ? I don't know anyone who even remembers it in detail.
> 
> Julia Gillard is a liar, fact proven, Abbott isn't a liar because you think he might be one day.




Tony Abbott and the gospel truth.

But because this process is instructive, which Julia Gillard lie are you referring to? Let's see if you can at least pick one that is real.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Yes you are going round in circles and refuse to see the flaw in asking a question about an issues that was closed 5 years ago and how it is obviously politically motivated.............the public aren't interested at all, the ABC just stirs ****.




I'm the public and I am interested in it ...



MrBurns said:


> No it's a scare campaign because it is. ??? Who ? I don't know anyone who even remembers it in detail.
> 
> Julia Gillard is a liar, fact proven, Abbott isn't a liar because you think he might be one day.




So that's what it comes down to, you can't even justify your own arguments so it's just I am right because I say so ...


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> But that is demonstratively false. Regular polling has shown that the majority of the public do think it is a valid concern. I disagree with them but I can't agree with your comments here.




Regular polling also shows that people will respond to any poll and mostly in the negative depending on how the question is framed.



> But because this process is instructive, which Julia Gillard lie are you referring to? Let's see if you can at least pick one that is real.




Take your pick, add the Carbon Tax as a featured lie, a major lie one which will go down in Labor history and one they will never recover from - 

https://www.liberal.org.au/labor-tells-lies


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> I'm the public and I am interested in it ...




No I mean reasonable normal people.



> So that's what it comes down to, you can't even justify your own arguments so it's just I am right because I say so ...




When you cant understand reason you must be told, like a child.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Regular polling also shows that people will respond to any poll and mostly in the negative depending on how the question is framed.




Can you back this up?



MrBurns said:


> Take your pick, add the Carbon Tax as a featured lie, a major lie one which will go down in Labor history and one they will never recover from -
> 
> https://www.liberal.org.au/labor-tells-lies




Pointing us straight to Liberal propaganda page... you sir are not biased at all...


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Can you back this up?




It's common sense , Google loaded questions or begging the question.



> Pointing us straight to Liberal propaganda page... you sir are not biased at all...




Is there anything in there you would care to dispute ?
Even the most mild mannered Labor simpleton, Kevin Rudd for instance, knows that Gillard is a liar,


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Regular polling also shows that people will respond to any poll and mostly in the negative depending on how the question is framed.




That means nothing in the context that it is a concern for people. You simply don't like the question or possible implications that traction for that point would have. As I said, I happen to agree with you that it is wrong but it is not push polling.



MrBurns said:


> Take your pick, add the Carbon Tax as a featured lie, a major lie one which will go down in Labor history and one they will never recover from -




Can you demonstrate or articulate what the Carbon Tax lie was? Given the infamy that you portray it with, it should be easy to do.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> That means nothing in the context that it is a concern for people. You simply don't like the question or possible implications that traction for that point would have. As I said, I happen to agree with you that it is wrong but it is not push polling.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you demonstrate or articulate what the Carbon Tax lie was? Given the infamy that you portray it with, it should be easy to do.




She has admitted she changed her mind when circumstances changed = translation =  lied.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She has admitted she changed her mind when circumstances changed = translation =  lied.




What did she say? What did she change her mind about? Be specific please, provide quotes and citations


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

Plonkers. The lot of you!


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> Plonkers. The lot of you!




Why thank you, this bottle of wine is nice!


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> What did she say? What did she change her mind about? Be specific please, provide quotes and citations




She mumbled something about "I know what I said then and you're probably wondering what I'm saying now"

Here's a round up of the most prominent lies, there will be a volume on the smaller ones when the printers can get enough paper in from China, they've never had an order so big.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She mumbled something about "I know what I said then and you're probably wondering what I'm saying now"




Cross posted and modified from here.



			
				The Australian - 20 August 2010 - Paul Kelly and Dennis Shanahan said:
			
		

> JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.
> 
> It will be part of a bold series of reforms that include school funding, education and health.
> 
> ...




Link.

Who proposed a carbon tax?



So Tony understands the difference between carbon pricing and a carbon tax. He even supported a carbon tax. I wonder what changed his mind?



			
				Tony Abbott said:
			
		

> If Australia is greatly to reduce its carbon emissions, the price of carbon intensive products should rise. The Coalition has always been instinctively cautious about new or increased taxes. That’s one of the reasons why the former government opted for an emissions trading scheme over a straight-forward carbon tax. Still, a new tax would be the intelligent skeptic’s way to deal with minimising emissions because it would be much easier than a property right to reduce or to abolish should the justification for it change.
> 
> ...
> 
> The fact that people don’t really understand what an emissions trading scheme entails is actually its key political benefit. Unlike a tax, which people would instinctively question, it’s easy to accept a trading scheme supported by businesses that see it as a money-making opportunity and environmentalists who assure people that it will help to save the planet. Forget the contested science and the dubious economics, an emissions trading scheme is brilliant, if hardly-honest politics because people have come to think that it’s a cost-less way to avoid climate catastrophe.




Carbon pricing in Australia.



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> A carbon pricing scheme in Australia, commonly referred to as a carbon tax, was introduced by the Gillard Government on 1 July 2012. It requires businesses emitting over 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions annually to purchase emissions permits. The scheme directly affects approximately 300 "liable entities" representing the highest emitters in Australia.
> 
> ...
> 
> The introduction of a carbon price in Australia has been controversial. The Federal opposition has accused the Government of breaking an election promise made prior to the 2010 election to not introduce a carbon tax. The Prime Minister has responded to these accusations by saying that circumstances changed following the 2010 election and that accusations of a broken promise are "semantics" and "word games". Opposition leader Tony Abbott has criticised the government's carbon pricing policy on economic grounds referring to it as "toxic" and likening it to an octopus embracing the whole of the economy. He has made a "pledge in blood" to repeal the tax after the 18 clean energy bills passed through the House of Representatives and has stated that the next election will be a referendum on the "carbon tax".




What Julia Gillard said about the carbon tax.



			
				Herald Sun said:
			
		

> Ms Gillard responded: “I've always believed climate change is real and that it is caused by carbon pollution and we have to reduce the amount we generate. Putting a price on carbon is the cheapest way of reducing that pollution. That's why I decided we should enact the carbon price. It's a fixed price for the first three years - effectively a tax - and then an emissions trading scheme with a cap on carbon pollution.
> 
> “… when I said those words I meant every one of them. During the election campaign I spoke about the need to price carbon and have an emissions trading scheme. And now we are pricing carbon - a fixed price to start with - to be followed in three years time by an emissions trading scheme that caps carbon pollution.”




I made sure I posted mainly from sources politically biased in an acceptable manner to people such as yourself 

The sad part is that there are valid criticisms to be made but I guess they are not as politically correct to complain about. Julia did say that she would hold a consultative assembly but then did not. Complaining about a cancelled gabfest doesn't have the same ring to it though does it but she did change her mind about that one. It's not the lie though that you want people to believe it to be, is it?


----------



## chops_a_must (21 May 2013)

By definition in the literature, it's not actually a tax.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

chops_a_must said:


> By definition in the literature, it's not actually a tax.




Indeed, hence the video of Tony Abbott proposing a Carbon tax is important. He understood the difference before it became politically convenient to forget that he supported a Carbon Tax.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Indeed, hence the video of Tony Abbott proposing a Carbon tax is important. He understood the difference before it became politically convenient to forget that he supported a Carbon Tax.




Abbott didn't make a commitment to sway an election then walk away from it after he won, that's Gillard for you, a liar, she also lied to the independents, otherwise they wouldn't have supported her, she's lied her way to the top.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Abbott didn't make a commitment to sway an election then walk away from it after he won, that's Gillard for you, a liar, she also lied to the independents, otherwise they wouldn't have supported her, she's lied her way to the top.




Gillard said before the election that she would propose a carbon pricing scheme, didn't she? The quote from the Australian demonstrates that she did so before the election. Correct?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Gillard said before the election that she would propose a carbon pricing scheme, didn't she? The quote from the Australian demonstrates that she did so before the election. Correct?




She must have said that to Tim in the dark because that's not what we remember and not what she admitted to doing and retracting when on Q@A (see video above)

At 2.06 through to 2.19 and just after that.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She must have said that to Tim in the dark because that's not what we remember and not what she admitted to doing and retracting when on Q@A (see video above)




It was in the Australian. You're not getting away with that.

I'm going to track down that interview and see for myself. The point is, she did not lie about a "Carbon Tax", what she did do was change her mind about the consultative assembly.

Isn't that correct? If so, and if you care about honesty so much, I expect to not see you complain about the carbon tax lie anymore.

Correct?

By all means, continue to complain about the assembly not happening and how she should have spent that money doing it. It's a fair and valid criticism that she did not hold that assembly.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> It was in the Australian. You're not getting away with that.
> 
> I'm going to track down that interview and see for myself. The point is, she did not lie about a "Carbon Tax", what she did do was change her mind about the consultative assembly.
> 
> ...




Watch the video and the times I posted.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Watch the video and the times I posted.




I have which is why I am following up on what that interview referred to. I'm betting it referred to the assembly but given that they cut it so short, we can't know until we find the interview. Ironically though, it won't matter because we have proof of what she said independent of that interview.

Are you, or are you not conceding the following:

 Julia Gillard stated before the election that she wanted to introduce a carbon pricing scheme?



			
				The Australian - 20 August 2010 - Paul Kelly and Dennis Shanahan said:
			
		

> JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.
> 
> It will be part of a bold series of reforms that include school funding, education and health.
> 
> ...




Link.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I have which is why I am following up on what that interview referred to. I'm betting it referred to the assembly but given that they cut it so short, we can't know until we find the interview. Ironically though, it won't matter because we have proof of what she said independent of that interview.
> 
> Are you, or are you not conceding the following:
> 
> ...




Q and A 14th March 2011 - she admits she walked away from that commitment..........she lied.


----------



## sptrawler (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Are you, or are you not conceding the following:
> 
> Julia Gillard stated before the election that she wanted to introduce a carbon pricing scheme?
> 
> ...




The funny thing is, the issue of if she lied or didn't lie has been lost in the dismal failure of the policy.
Much like everything else they've done.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Q and A 14th March 2011 - she admits she walked away from that commitment..........she lied.




I said I am checking what that actually referred to. Are you unable to concede that independent of that interview, The Australian holds record of Julia Gillard stating that she intends to implement a carbon price?

Seriously.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> The funny thing is, the issue of if she lied or didn't lie has been lost in the dismal failure of the policy.
> Much like everything else they've done.




Exactly. There are so many valid criticisms, again whether we agree or not is almost irrelevant, but people will never be able to hold discussions about those if they can't even acknowledge that she said something which is on the public record.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I said I am checking what that actually referred to. Are you unable to concede that The Australian holds record of Julia Gillard stating that she intends to implement a carbon price?
> 
> Seriously.




I think her major lie on the eve  of the election supersedes that, she lied to get votes and it worked.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I think her major lie on the eve  of the election supersedes that, she lied to get votes and it worked.




It's a yes or no answer.

Did Julia Gillard state before the election that she intended to implement a carbon pricing scheme.

That you can't answer that simple question when proof is put in front of you, says everything anyone needs to know. When you can answer that question, we will continue.

And I am reading the 14 March 2011 transcript now.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

Not sure if this has been posted - waded through many posts and can't see it so apologies if it's been put up.  But here's an interesting poll:



> Our survey was conducted by telephone with carefully selected journalists from newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations, online news sites and news agency AAP, as a sample of the 8000 to 10,000 journalists in Australia today.
> 
> When asked about their voting intentions, less than two-thirds of the journalists we surveyed revealed their voting intention. Of those 372 people, 43.0% said they would give their first preference vote to Labor; 30.2% would vote for the Coalition; and 19.4% said they would choose the Greens – about twice the Australian average.
> 
> However, 41.2% of the 34 ABC journalists who declared a voting intention said they would vote for the Greens, followed by 32.4% for Labor and 14.7% for the Coalition.








http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...vey_confirms_all_you_suspected_about_the_abc/

http://theconversation.com/whose-vi...y to vote out Labor while reporters lean left


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Q and A 14th March 2011 - she admits she walked away from that commitment..........she lied.




I think the lie you are referring to is her bringing forward the carbon price instead of 2013 times frame/next term that she originally referred to. 

I will try and get proof of this.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Not sure if this has been posted - waded through many posts and can't see it so apologies if it's been put up.  But here's an interesting poll:




Did you read the second link? In particular the study author's comment about the lack of link between voting intention and bias was interesting as well. I hope Andrew Bolt updates his blog post according. The News Limited figures were impressive if one wants to look at the ABC in that context.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> It's a yes or no answer.
> 
> Did Julia Gillard state before the election that she intended to implement a carbon pricing scheme.
> 
> .




Don't care the big lie superseded that anyway.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Not sure if this has been posted - waded through many posts and can't see it so apologies if it's been put up.  But here's an interesting poll:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks sails,

Mr Burns, have a look at the numbers on the table. The majority of journalists at all other institutions said they would vote for Labour. Are these institutions biased too?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Don't care the big lie superseded that anyway.




You're just not interested in the truth are you. So why should anyone care about your complaints regarding someone else's honesty. Look at how hard it is to get you to acknowledge simple black and white reality.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Don't care the big lie superseded that anyway.





And you were calling me an child that did not stand to reason ...


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Thanks sails,
> 
> Mr Burns, have a look at the numbers on the table. The majority of journalists at all other institutions said they would vote for Labour. Are these institutions biased too?




They're probably on bludging Labor grants, dunno, don't care see you on Sept 14th



Some Dude said:


> You're just not interested in the truth are you. So why should anyone care about your complaints regarding someone else's honesty.




The truth is she lied and admitted it on Q and A..........get over it


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Does anyone else understand what this big lie that supersedes the other one is? I'm nearly finished this transcript but that has me confused.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> And you were calling me an child that did not stand to reason ...




You're grasping at straws trying to win points that don't matter, look at the big picture, she is a failure of the highest order surrounded by lap dogs who will support her.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Does anyone else understand what this big lie that supersedes the other one is? I'm nearly finished this transcript but that has me confused.




Where she admits she walked away from that commitment, that supersedes any trivial little point you're trying to prove about her previous intentions, if you were right she wouldn't have made that statement on Q and A.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Where she admits she walked away from that commitment, that supersedes any trivial little point you're trying to prove about her previous intentions, if you were right she wouldn't have made that statement on Q and A.




Link.



			
				Julia Gillard Before The Election said:
			
		

> JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.
> 
> It will be part of a bold series of reforms that include school funding, education and health.
> 
> ...


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> You're grasping at straws trying to win points that don't matter, look at the big picture, she is a failure of the highest order surrounded by lap dogs who will support her.




I am grasping at straws? You sir have lost all credibility. When prompted, you can't provide any proof save a video without context on a side topic. 

The crux of your original argument was that ABC is biased because:

1) They asked a survey question about work choices and this should not be done because the coalition said they won't bring it back.
2) They did not include the absolute negative (or positive) as a choice. Since you would have answered as such, this shows bias beyond doubt.

You have dismissed all arguments presented to you about about statistics and survey design. You have dismissed work choices as a topic that anyone would be interested in.

And I am grasping at straws? The question of Julia Gillard's government and it's performance is a separate one to the ABC being biased. If you wish to discuss that particular topic, there are other threads around. But at this point you have to provide some proof or logic to your argument apart from _I believe that is the case and therefore it must be true. _

*
Otherwise you should withdraw your complaint about ABC bias.*


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Link.





I refer you to the video, end of story.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Where she admits she walked away from that commitment, that supersedes any trivial little point you're trying to prove about her previous intentions, if you were right she wouldn't have made that statement on Q and A.




I can understand your confusion. Her quote in full.



			
				JULIA GILLARD said:
			
		

> Well, poor polling I'll - questions of polling I'll let other people talk about but I'm actually glad you asked me that question because it gives me an opportunity to explain and I do want to talk to the Australian people about what I said in the last election. Now, I did say during the last election campaign - I promised that there would be no carbon tax. That's true and I've walked away from that commitment and I'm not going to try and pretend anything else. I also said to the Australian people in the last election campaign that we needed to act on climate change. We needed to price carbon and I wanted to see an emissions trading scheme. Then we had the election and the 17 days that were and we formed this minority government. Now, if I'd been leading a majority government I would have been getting on with an emissions trading scheme. It's what I promised the Australian people. As it is, in this minority parliament, the only way I can act on climate change by pricing carbon it to work with others and so I had a really start choice. Do I act or not act? _*Well, I've chosen to act and we will have a fixed price, like a carbon tax, for a period and then get to exactly what I promised the Australian people, an emissions trading scheme. Now, when I said during the election campaign there would be no carbon tax I didn't intend to mislead people. What I believed then is an emissions trading scheme is right for this country. I believe that now and we will get to that emissions trading scheme.*_




I concede that she provides a contradictory answer there but as I said earlier, I can independently provide proof that she did state her intention. This leads me to my belief above that it refers to the fixed priced period which she is on record as saying is like a tax.

Are you going to acknowledge that she did state before the election that she was going to implement a carbon price or not?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> I am grasping at straws? You sir have lost all credibility. When prompted, you can't provide any proof save a video without context on a side topic.
> 
> The crux of your original argument was that ABC is biased because:
> 
> ...




Withdraw my complaint about ABC bias ? me and millions of others I resume you refer to.

Yes you're grasping  at straws defending the worst PM in Australian history must drive you to desperate measures.

Let's see how you go on Sept 14th.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I refer you to the video, end of story.




Sorry, you have real proof otherwise but I thank you for your input.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I can understand your confusion. Her quote in full.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No she said she wasnt , see the video again and stop grasping at straws.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Sorry, you have real proof otherwise but I thank you for your input.




The video is proof enough for most Australians, where do you fit in ?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> No she said she wasnt , see the video again and stop grasping at straws.




Read the transcript which is the complete response. She specifically refers to the fixed term period. I have highlighted it above.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Read the transcript which is the complete response. She specifically refers to the fixed term period. I have highlighted it above.




The response I'm interested in is the one where she admits walking away from her commitment. 
Liar.............


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Withdraw my complaint about ABC bias ? me and millions of others I resume you refer to.
> 
> Yes you're grasping  at straws defending the worst PM in Australian history must drive you to desperate measures.
> 
> Let's see how you go on Sept 14th.




No just you. If anyone else provides proof, they can complain all they want.

I am not defending the PM or the current government. They are a bad government by anyone's standards. More so by mine but not necessarily why you think so.

I am defending the truth, or rather the dissemination of facts rather than opinion without an once of proof or credibility.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The response I'm interested in is the one where she admits walking away from her commitment.
> Liar.............




That is because you have an agenda that does not require reality.

Enjoy your fantasy.

For everyone else, never rely on a highly edited video. Always check the source.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The response I'm interested in is the one where she admits walking away from her commitment.
> Liar.............




Her commitment to what exactly?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I can understand your confusion. Her quote in full.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Your highlighted section changes nothing, stop grasping at straws, it's still a lie.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Her commitment to what exactly?




To not have a carbon tax, now I've wasted enough time trying to reason with people who can't believe their own eyes when they see a video, so lets leave it at that


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Your highlighted section changes nothing, stop grasping at straws, it's still a lie.




Instead of going around in circles, in desperation, can you bother to string a sentence together and tell us exactly what you think she lied about and what she actually lied about?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> That is because you have an agenda that does not require reality.
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy.
> 
> For everyone else, never rely on a highly edited video. Always check the source.




I think someone who sees a video that proves she lied and the convolutes things to try to prove otherwise is the one with the fantasy problem, don't worry you'll be straightened out on Sept 14th


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> To not have a carbon tax, now I've wasted enough time trying to reason with people who can't believe their own eyes when they see a video, so lets leave it at that




No let's not leave it at that. You have quoted a video snippet out of context. When presented with the full transcript of the interview including the context, you still hold on to this false notion.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Instead of going around in circles, in desperation, can you bother to string a sentence together and tell us exactly what you think she lied about and what she actually lied about?




I rest my case , here we have a Labor tragic who is unable to comprehend plain English and recognise that following a liar and a cheat is unwise.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I rest my case , here we have a Labor tragic who is unable to comprehend plain English and recognise that following a liar and a cheat is unwise.




What leads you to the conclusion that I am a Labour tragic let alone a Labour voter?


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Instead of going around in circles, in desperation, can you bother to string a sentence together and tell us exactly what you think she lied about and what she actually lied about?




Would this help?...lol




This hit the airwaves a few days before the election - and then on the night before the election (despite her rock solid commitment of "no carbon tax" as above - she states that she would view election victory as a mandate to price carbon...that puts her previous so called 'commitment' of no carbon tax to the Australian a people in a very shaky position, imo.  And carbon tax would be much the same as carbon price - does the same sort of thing - so no splitting hairs on that one.



> In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.




http://www.news.com.au/features/fed...on-price-promise/story-fn5tar6a-1225907552000


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> No let's not leave it at that. You have quoted a video snippet out of context. When presented with the full transcript of the interview including the context, you still hold on to this false notion.




More pertinently, when provided with independent and contradicting information, has sought to rely on the highly selective video snippet which they believe supports their world view.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> This hit the airwaves a few days before the election - and then on the night before the election (despite her rock solid commitment of "no carbon tax" as above - she states that she would view election victory as a mandate to price carbon...that puts her previous so called 'commitment' of no carbon tax to the Australian a people in a very shaky position, imo.  And carbon tax would be much the same as carbon price - does the same sort of thing - so no splitting hairs on that one.




That is the real question. Is a carbon price different to a carbon tax. Julia seemed to think so in her pre-election interviews. Tony Abbott thought so when he supported a Carbon Tax. Why would we think they are the same?

Or were both wrong and that it is a distinction without difference. If it is, then Julia saying that she wanted to implement a carbon price settles that, albeit she (and Tony) were trying to be too tricky by half by defining a difference.


----------



## Ves (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Would this help?...lol



I've always wondered, what program do they use to make the youtube videos cut off mid-sentence without making it look like that actually happened?


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> More pertinently, when provided with independent and contradicting information, has sought to rely on the highly selective video snippet which they believe supports their world view.




Let's see how the majority of Aussies understood the video snippet which, as I recall, was blasted out over the airwaves many times per day for several days before the election.  It wasn't just a little quiet one-off statement as I remember it.

Go ahead and think whatever you like. September 14 will tell us what voters think of the carbon tax debacle.  And Gillard's promise to 'stop the boats' and Gillard's repeated promises for surpluses while they spend like there is no tomorrow.  Shall I go on?...

Did you know the name Gillard has the word "liar" in it?


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Would this help?...lol
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Sails,

That's politics being played right there. She is a lawyer after all. However it does not make her a liar because as stated in the article some dude cited, she has always maintained no "carbon tax" but def a "carbon price". All about context.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

See you all on Sept 14th, that will be a joyous day for all thinking Australians who despise lies and deception


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

```

```



Ves said:


> I've always wondered, what program do they use to make the youtube videos cut off mid-sentence without making it look like that actually happened?




Did you have your head under a rock before the last election?  The message was loud and clear from Gillard:


"There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead"
​


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Let's see how the majority of Aussies understood the video snippet which, as I recall, was blasted out over the airwaves many times per day for several days before the election.  It wasn't just a little quiet one-off statement as I remember it.
> 
> Go ahead and think whatever you like. September 14 will tell us what voters think of the carbon tax debacle.  And Gillard's promise to 'stop the boats' and Gillard's repeated promises for surpluses while they spend like there is no tomorrow.  Shall I go on?...
> 
> Did you know the name Gillard has the word "liar" in it?




Sails this is a discussion for another thread. I don't disagree with much of what you say although most of avid liberal supporters seem to forgot all context when they make these claims.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> ```
> 
> ```
> 
> ...




Do you acknowledge that she did state that she wanted to implement a carbon price?


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> ```
> 
> ```
> 
> ...




Your point?

There is a carbon price, not a tax.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Do you acknowledge that she did state that she wanted to implement a carbon price?



No, cant you read ?


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Sails,
> 
> That's politics being played right there. She is a lawyer after all. However it does not make her a liar because as stated in the article some dude cited, she has always maintained no "carbon tax" but def a "carbon price". All about context.





To the great majority of Aussies, Carbon Tax, Carbon Price, ETS, whatever tag you put on it means our electricity suppliers will be taxed by some means and they will pass the cost on to us.

She can play her lawyer tricks in court but I really don't think the majority of the voting public will think she was clever.  You will get your answers on September 14th.


----------



## Ves (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> ```
> 
> ```
> 
> ...



Can you please post the full clip?


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> To the great majority of Aussies, Carbon Tax, Carbon Price, ETS, whatever tag you put on it means our electricity suppliers will be taxed by some means and they will pass the cost on to us.
> 
> She can play her lawyer tricks in court but I really don't think the majority of the voting public will think she was clever.  You will get your answers on September 14th.




I believe she may be charged in connection wit the AWU scandal before the election so she can lie her way out of that one too.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> To the great majority of Aussies, Carbon Tax, Carbon Price, ETS, whatever tag you put on it means our electricity suppliers will be taxed by some means and they will pass the cost on to us.
> 
> She can play her lawyer tricks in court but I really don't think the majority of the voting public will think she was clever.  You will get your answers on September 14th.




Yes I agree with what you are saying but that's politics. She always said she was going to put a price on carbon.

Again you assume I am a Labour voter.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Ves said:


> Can you please post the full clip?




I think you only get one big fat lie per clip.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Your point?
> 
> There is a carbon price, not a tax.




Carbon tax was the thing that was legislated.  Carbon tax bill passes 

Stop your stupid splitting of hairs.  Carbon tax/carbon price do the same thing anyway.  Are you saying that Gillard deliberately deceived the people by saying their would be no carbon tax and she always was going to implement a carbon price?

That is disgusting, if true.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

Well almost time to watch Lateline and see how many $billions we haven't got Gillard is promising to give away today in return for votes.

I mean everything she does is "historic" isn't it ?

Surrounded by school kids and the disabled she lurches toward the election, isn't she marvellous ?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Stop your stupid splitting of hairs.  Carbon tax/carbon price do the same thing anyway.  Are you saying that Gillard deliberately deceived the people by saying their would be no carbon tax and she always was going to implement a carbon price?




So why have both Tony and Julia made the case that there is a difference? If there isn't a difference then Julia is on record as saying that she will implement one.

I can repost the links if you want?


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Carbon tax was the thing that was legislated.




It's actually called the Clean Energy Bill 2011. No mention of Carbon Tax, plenty of mention about the pricing and trading scheme which Julia did propose before the election.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Yes I agree with what you are saying but that's politics. She always said she was going to put a price on carbon.
> 
> Again you assume I am a Labour voter.




I don't care who you vote for.  I simply can't understand anyone defending a PM who, it looks like, deliberately deceived voters by splitting hairs with terminology on a pre-election commitment.  Do you think she would be in government now if she hadn't promised "no carbon tax" given voter opposition to pricing carbon by any means?

To deliberately trick voters is the lowest of the lows, imo. That demeans the office of PM if that's how she has justified it.  Shameful.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> I don't care who you vote for.  I simply can't understand anyone defending a PM who, it looks like, deliberately deceived voters by splitting hairs with terminology on a pre-election commitment.  Do you think she would be in government now if she hadn't promised "no carbon tax" given voter opposition to pricing carbon by any means?




She clearly stated that she supports a carbon price. The rest is politics, both sides play it just as hard. Disgusting? yes. Reality? yes.



sails said:


> To deliberately trick voters is the lowest of the lows, imo. That demeans the office of PM if that's how she has justified it.  Shameful.




And this is different from any other government how? All governments trick voters or pay them off.

Anyways that's a discussion for another thread. This was about the bias in the ABC and Mr Burns is yet to provide proof of this statements.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

I will repost this poll showing there is very much bias in the ABC as it got lost in the nonsense:



> Our survey was conducted by telephone with carefully selected journalists from newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations, online news sites and news agency AAP, as a sample of the 8000 to 10,000 journalists in Australia today.
> 
> When asked about their voting intentions, less than two-thirds of the journalists we surveyed revealed their voting intention. Of those 372 people, 43.0% said they would give their first preference vote to Labor; 30.2% would vote for the Coalition; and 19.4% said they would choose the Greens – about twice the Australian average.
> 
> However,* 41.2% of the 34 ABC journalists who declared a voting intention said they would vote for the Greens, followed by 32.4% for Labor and 14.7% for the Coalition*.




View attachment 52318


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...vey_confirms_all_you_suspected_about_the_abc/

http://theconversation.com/whose-vi...y to vote out Labor while reporters lean left


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> To deliberately trick voters is the lowest of the lows, imo. That demeans the office of PM if that's how she has justified it.  Shameful.




What exactly was the trick? If you acknowledge that Julia stated before the election that she wanted to implement a carbon price and you believe that a carbon price is no different to a carbon tax, then where is the trick?

I don't agree with that line of reasoning but it's difficult to follow your line of thought there.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> I will repost this poll showing there is very much bias in the ABC as it got lost in the nonsense:




Also worth reposting is the author's comments:



			
				Folker Hanusch said:
			
		

> It is important to note that there is little research showing that journalists' personal political biases affect their work.
> 
> When asked in this survey about a range of influences on their work, many journalists said their superiors have a much stronger influence than their personal values and beliefs.




And from the comments section:



			
				Folker Hanusch said:
			
		

> It is very difficult to show any link between a journalists' political views and the stories they write. There has been a little bit of research, and it generally suggests that there is little if no link between the two. The thing is that most journalists do not go into the profession with a political intention, so they are then also not necessarily likely to display their conviction in their stories. Opinion/comment pieces may be a different kettle of fish, and they're mostly written by senior journos. The issue is that it would seem even though most rank-and-file journos lean to the left, this may be evened out by the fact their superiors are more likely to be conservative voters. And in a newsroom, it's those senior editors who decide broad news agendas.
> Of course with this kind of research we can only ever go by what journalists tell us - they may indeed be lying, but that's a problem with all surveys, incl. polls.
> I am cautious about the ABC/News Ltd distinctions because the numbers are quite small. So while there is a difference between the two that's statistically significant, I won't be totally confident of the percentages as such - they have a higher sample error. Besides, what is interesting is that journos at all three major organisations have a left bias (News Ltd is actually 66.3% left if you combine Labor and the Greens). Again, though, whether that actually influences the news reporting is another questions.


----------



## MrBurns (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> She clearly stated that she supports a carbon price. The rest is politics, both sides play it just as hard. Disgusting? yes. Reality? yes.
> 
> And this is different from any other government how? All governments trick voters or pay them off.
> 
> Anyways that's a discussion for another thread. This was about the bias in the ABC and Mr Burns is yet to provide proof of this statements.




Well that's BS your just trolling....you haven't proved anything except your own inability to accept the truth.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> I will repost this poll showing there is very much bias in the ABC as it got lost in the nonsense:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




ergo New ltd and fairfax should be pro Labour right?


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> And this is different from any other government how? All governments trick voters or pay them off.




so you admit that Gillard tricked (aka deceived) voters with terminology.  Be interesting to see what voters think of her doing that on Sept 14.


----------



## Calliope (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Again you assume I am a Labour voter.




I think you mean Labor. So if you can't spell it that rules you out. But you obviously are a Gillard lover, otherwise you wouldn't pretend that she is not a serial liar.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> so you admit that Gillard tricked (aka deceived) voters with terminology.  Be interesting to see what voters think of her doing that on Sept 14.




I don't!!! Tony Abbott also thought there was a difference. Julia also states that the fixed term period acts like a carbon tax. If they were not different, that would be a pointless distinction.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> I think you mean Labor. So if you can't spell it that rules you out. But you obviously are a Gillard lover, otherwise you wouldn't pretend that she is not a serial liar.




A cliche you will like 

Wow, that doesn't so much raise the bar when it comes to standards as lowers the floor.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> so you admit that Gillard tricked (aka deceived) voters with terminology.  Be interesting to see what voters think of her doing that on Sept 14.




My prediction is that she will lose the election. My *opinion* is that the most likely government for the next term is the liberal coalition. It is also my *opinion* that they will be a better government than the current one. However in *my opinion* they will not be a good enough government.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> I think you mean Labor. So if you can't spell it that rules you out. But you obviously are a Gillard lover, otherwise you wouldn't pretend that she is not a serial liar.




My sincere apologies sir. It is 10:30 at night and I am trying to program an MR scanner while trying to keep up with posts here. However that should not be an excuse not to spell correctly ...


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> My sincere apologies sir. It is 10:30 at night and I am trying to program an MR scanner while trying to keep up with posts here. However that should not be an excuse not to spell correctly ...




It has been a rapid fire night.


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> so you admit that Gillard tricked (aka deceived) voters with terminology.  Be interesting to see what voters think of her doing that on Sept 14.




Tony understood there is a difference when he proposed a carbon tax.



			
				Tony Abbott said:
			
		

> If Australia is greatly to reduce its carbon emissions, the price of carbon intensive products should rise. The Coalition has always been instinctively cautious about new or increased taxes. That’s one of the reasons why the former government opted for an emissions trading scheme over a straight-forward carbon tax. Still, a new tax would be the intelligent skeptic’s way to deal with minimising emissions because it would be much easier than a property right to reduce or to abolish should the justification for it change.
> 
> ...
> 
> The fact that people don’t really understand what an emissions trading scheme entails is actually its key political benefit. Unlike a tax, which people would instinctively question, it’s easy to accept a trading scheme supported by businesses that see it as a money-making opportunity and environmentalists who assure people that it will help to save the planet. Forget the contested science and the dubious economics, an emissions trading scheme is brilliant, if hardly-honest politics because people have come to think that it’s a cost-less way to avoid climate catastrophe.


----------



## FlyingFox (21 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> It has been a rapid fire night.




Indeed. Did we break the server because the flak has suddenly stopped? lol.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

Some Dude - that's it from me.  All been discussed.  Not being drawn in any further into nitpicking and splitting hairs.  Goodnight.


----------



## sails (21 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Indeed. Did we break the server because the flak has suddenly stopped? lol.




LOL


----------



## Some Dude (21 May 2013)

sails said:


> Some Dude - that's it from me.  All been discussed.  Not being drawn in any further into nitpicking and splitting hairs.  Goodnight.




The information is there to demonstrate that the difference has been understood and stated well before the election. What hasn't been discussed is why you reject them. Simply stating that it is splitting hairs does not make it so when Julia, Tony, and the legislation demonstrate a difference.



			
				The Conversation said:
			
		

> The proposed carbon pricing policy in Australia is now routinely referred to as a "carbon tax" by both government and opposition. This is odd, because the proposed scheme is not actually a tax.
> 
> How does an ETS work?
> 
> ...






			
				The Conversation said:
			
		

> Where is Australia in all this?
> 
> The system the Australian government is currently proposing to move to in the medium term is a standard ETS, not a carbon tax. But in the short term, there is a twist. The proposal is to fix the price of permits for the first few years, presumably to reduce uncertainty during the transition period after the scheme commences. It would still be an ETS, with a cap on emissions and permits that can be traded, but the price of permits would be fixed by the government. There is a similarity between the fixed-price ETS approach and a carbon tax. If the fixed price is set at a high enough level, then it would be that price, rather than the cap, that determines the level of emissions. At that high carbon price, people would actually emit less than the maximum level set by the cap. In that case, the ETS would be behaving somewhat like a tax.
> 
> ...


----------



## Calliope (22 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Indeed. Did we break the server because the flak has suddenly stopped? lol.




Actually the flak was coming from you and Dude trying to prove that Gillard is not a liar, by the use of semantics. You  failed.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> Actually the flak was coming from you and Dude trying to prove that Gillard is not a liar, by the use of semantics. You  failed.




I don't know about flying fox but I wasn't trying to prove she doesn't tell lies and I suspect that neither was flying fox. I think Julia, Tony, Kevin, Malcom, everyone lies. Simply that in this case, it is not the lie that people claim it is.

I don't know why the people are so worried, it's not like there isn't plenty of valid criticism on this and other topics to get your rage going. Why are you guys so scared of facts that contradict your narratives? Just change your narrative to incorporate what are ridiculously obvious facts for anyone who care about whether what they believe and communicate to others is true. If anything, I am doing you guys a favour by demonstrating how to not look like you have no interest in publicly available and obvious facts.

Don't you care whether public and easily available facts contradict what you tell others?


----------



## FlyingFox (22 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I don't know about flying fox but I wasn't trying to prove she doesn't tell lies and I suspect that neither was flying fox. I think Julia, Tony, Kevin, Malcom, everyone lies. Simply that in this case, it is not the lie that people claim it is. The only person who tried to assert that someone hasn't lied was MrBurns about Tony Abbott, something I find that simply reinforces the idea that MrBurns is not interested in what is true.
> 
> I don't know why the people are so worried, it's not like there isn't plenty of valid criticism on this and other topics to get your rage going. Why are you guys so scared of facts that contradict your narratives? Just change your narrative to incorporate what are ridiculously obvious facts for anyone who care about whether what they believe and communicate to others is true.
> 
> Don't you care whether public and easily available facts contradict what you tell others?




+10. I wasn't trying to prove that she isn't a liar. However I hate the fact that the prejudices and perceived biases of a some posters tend to derail or stop valid discussions on a number of important and interesting topics.

Any time I have asked about coalition policy ( or Labor policy for that matter) and how it measures up against what may be needed in these potentially difficult economic times. I get responses about Gillard being incompetent and a liar. Fair enough. But what is the alternative? Is the liberals policy to get into parliament do nothing? They might still do better than Labor but is that what we as the populace want or need?

The Labor governments should be crucified on the failings of the implementations of their policies. However, at the heart of it, a lot of their policies have been quite good. Very badly executed but quite good. However we are eternally stuck in this circle of finger pointing and "they are doing it so it must be wrong". Similarly I would like to see some decent policies from the liberals, time for the tough decision. If they have the mandate that everyone claims, lets see them stop middle class welfare. Instead they chose to run propaganda campaigns about super changes that affects a very small percentage of the population in total (Maybe a larger proportion here).

Why don't the liberals try to bring back work choices (a milder form perhaps)? As unpopular a move as that will be, it is probably the right one economically. Many posters are complaining about the unions and their influence, isn't work choices a solution?

I am very happy that they are planning on getting rid of the baby bonus... a good start...


----------



## FlyingFox (22 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> Actually the flak was coming from you and Dude trying to prove that Gillard is not a liar, by the use of semantics. You  failed.




Is that all you care about? That you think you were right and everyone else is wrong?


----------



## sails (22 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Is that all you care about? That you think you were right and everyone else is wrong?




Calm down, Flying Fox.  Calliope simply pointed out what happened yesterday.

Sounds like you are trying to bait another argument.


----------



## Calliope (22 May 2013)

Silly me I have just been infracted for provoking others...Dude actually.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

sails said:


> Calm down, Flying Fox.  Calliope simply pointed out what happened yesterday.
> 
> Sounds like you are trying to bait another argument.




By responding to someone who made a comment about them and their motives?

Seriously?

Really?


----------



## FlyingFox (22 May 2013)

sails said:


> Calm down, Flying Fox.  Calliope simply pointed out what happened yesterday.
> 
> Sounds like you are trying to bait another argument.




Firstly, I apologise for letting my emotions get the better of me. I should have used my better judgement. However I can't see how you can come to the conclusion that dude and I are baiting arguments, save perhaps for the previous post, when all we have done is show proof and ask for it. On the other hand, posters on the other side of the argument have relied on personal attacks, stating that we are wrong and only that and asserting that their opinions are truth without providing any context or proof.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> However I can't see how you can come to the conclusion that dude and I are baiting arguments, save perhaps for the previous post, when all we have done is show proof and ask for it.




Not baiting, genuinely mystified.


----------



## Julia (22 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Firstly, I apologise for letting my emotions get the better of me. I should have used my better judgement. However I can't see how you can come to the conclusion that dude and I are baiting arguments, save perhaps for the previous post, when all we have done is show proof and ask for it. On the other hand, posters on the other side of the argument have relied on personal attacks, stating that we are wrong and only that and asserting that their opinions are truth without providing any context or proof.



"Posters on the other side of the argument have relied on personal attacks....."

   Flying Fox, you are usually reasonable and thoughtful in your discussions, and I've never before seen you join in a concerted attack on one person, viz in this case, Mr Burns, to the extent where - from the position of someone not engaging in this debate at present - it looks like outright bullying.

There has been an increasing viciousness recently in some 'discussions' where there is little evidence of genuine exchange of views, and rather a petty, nit picking, point-scoring display of quasi solipsistic sophistry.

I may be wrong and this might be the stuff of successful forums, but personally I find it nasty and counter-productive.  It's the reason several good people no longer post here, people who used to make thoughtful and genuine contributions.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> Flying Fox, you are usually reasonable and thoughtful in your discussions, and I've never before seen you join in a concerted attack on one person, viz in this case, Mr Burns, to the extent where - from the position of someone not engaging in this debate at present - it looks like outright bullying.




If you believe this to be true, then why don't you submit a complaint to the forum administrator?


----------



## FlyingFox (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> "Posters on the other side of the argument have relied on personal attacks....."
> 
> Flying Fox, you are usually reasonable and thoughtful in your discussions, and I've never before seen you join in a concerted attack on one person, viz in this case, Mr Burns, to the extent where - from the position of someone not engaging in this debate at present - it looks like outright bullying.
> 
> There has been an increasing viciousness recently in some 'discussions' where there is little evidence of genuine exchange of views, and rather a petty, nit picking, point-scoring display of quasi solipsistic sophistry.





I am genuinely sorry you feel that way as you are among the few people on this forums who's views and discussions I genuinely value. This was not my intention at all. All I did was ask Mr Burns to back his opinion on why he thought the ABC was biased. His opinion was based on the fact that they posted a survey about workchoices and this did not include the affirmative no. When told that this is a balanced survey and usually these have limited choices for statistical reasons. He maintained his opinion without providing any proof.

If I were to post my opinions that were contrary to other's and was trying to present these as fact's I would surely be and have been asked to back these up. In the cases I have been in error, I have sincerely apologised and retracted my opinion or presented it as such.



Julia said:


> I may be wrong and this might be the stuff of successful forums, but personally I find it nasty and counter-productive.  It's the reason several good people no longer post here, people who used to make thoughtful and genuine contributions.




I too find it nasty and counter intuitive. Just as much as I find all conversations about the current government or election being stuck on "Julia is a liar" being counter intuitive.

My sincere apologies if I have offended anyone, especially yourself Julia. I don't know whether you count me in the group of good posters but at this juncture I will certainly be in the group of non-posters as I have neither the time nor the energy (or frankly inclination) to continue here.


----------



## wayneL (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> There has been an increasing viciousness recently in some 'discussions' where there is little evidence of genuine exchange of views, and rather a petty, nit picking, point-scoring display of quasi solipsistic sophistry.




Julia, 

I think it just reflects the standard of interchange from our politicians (and system of civil law for that matter).... tribal, adversarial, fallacious.

The truth has become irrelevant.


----------



## MrBurns (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> Flying Fox, you are usually reasonable and thoughtful in your discussions, and I've never before seen you join in a concerted attack on one person, viz in this case, Mr Burns, to the extent where - from the position of someone not engaging in this debate at present - it looks like outright bullying.
> 
> .




Thanks Julia , I would have ignored it but decided to respond for as long as it took, it took all night and I wont bother again, trying to talk people into submission by repeatedly going over the same thing until they give up is a known tactic.


----------



## Julia (22 May 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> I am genuinely sorry you feel that way as you are among the few people on this forums who's views and discussions I genuinely value. This was not my intention at all. All I did was ask Mr Burns to back his opinion on why he thought the ABC was biased. His opinion was based on the fact that they posted a survey about workchoices and this did not include the affirmative no. When told that this is a balanced survey and usually these have limited choices for statistical reasons. He maintained his opinion without providing any proof.



I understand that, FF, and it doesn't seem unreasonable when thus expressed.  Perhaps consider that a person's *opinion* has usually been formed over a period of time, from various inputs and observations.  So, when asked to provide 'proof' of such an opinion (which I'm sure you'll agree is widely held across the community) I'm not quite sure what you'd be looking for?  Perhaps examples like the balance of contributing journalists on "Insiders"?

Apart from some of the ABC journalists themselves, I don't think there would be too many people who didn't agree that there is clear Left bias in some ABC programs.  Just as there is a clear Right bias in "The Australian".
Why there is so much resentment directed toward the ABC in this respect is probably because it's a taxpayer funded organisation and charged with the responsibility of providing balanced commentary.

FWIW I think "7.30" and "Four Corners" are doing a great job of being objective and unafraid to tackle issues that are potentially highly critical to any side of politics.

I'm not sure that I've properly answered your concern about proof and for that I'm sorry.



> If I were to post my opinions that were contrary to other's and was trying to present these as fact's I would surely be and have been asked to back these up. In the cases I have been in error, I have sincerely apologised and retracted my opinion or presented it as such.



Indeed you have and it's much appreciated.



> My sincere apologies if I have offended anyone, especially yourself Julia. I don't know whether you count me in the group of good posters



Absolutely do, FF, which is why I was so surprised at what seemed to me to be out of character participation in an argument that escalated so unpleasantly.


> but at this juncture I will certainly be in the group of non-posters as I have neither the time nor the energy (or frankly inclination) to continue here.



I very much hope you'll reconsider such an inclination, FF, much as I can empathise with it.



wayneL said:


> Julia,
> 
> I think it just reflects the standard of interchange from our politicians (and system of civil law for that matter).... tribal, adversarial, fallacious.
> 
> The truth has become irrelevant.



I expect you're right, wayne.  It would be good, however, if we could try to maybe counteract rather than copy the woeful behaviour of those who are supposed to be leading the nation or proposing to do so.


----------



## MrBurns (22 May 2013)

The ABC in their Drum section of the web site let pro Lib comments through then allow the Labor drones to pull the comment apart BUT do not allow the original poster recourse, not always but on too many occasions.


----------



## sails (22 May 2013)

Joe Blow said:


> Julia, you are correct and in my opinion things always start to go wrong when the discussion drifts from the topic at hand to those having the discussion. Someone will make an insulting remark about someone else, put words in someone else's mouth or otherwise make an unjustified personal attack on another participant in the discussion and from that point forward the chances of a constructive, useful debate occurring become virtually nil.
> 
> I would like to point out to everyone that it is possible to disagree and exchange ideas without insulting or making personal attacks on others. There is no good or justifiable reason to attack others personally because of  their opinions. If you take issue with someone else's opinion then critique their opinion, not them personally. Good discussion and debate do not require insults.
> 
> ...




Joe, can I suggest the off-topic posts in the last 24 hours or so be removed from this thread?  At least twice I posted a poll on the bias of the ABC which got completely swamped in the verbal gunshots.  The argument had nothing to do with the ABC - might have started off that way but ended up nothing to do with it.

 I logged in later in the evening and what I saw  a very out of character frenzied gang like attack on MrBurns.  I stepped in to give him support but couldn't believe the rudeness, nit picking and hair splitting that was going on.  I think this whole miserable and unnecessary show of nastiness should be wiped off, imo.

I don't like reporting posts, but will do so in future if I ever see anything like that again - or even starting to happen.


EDIT - Joe, if posts are removed from here and you don't want them deleted, one suggestion is to shift them to the "carbon tax lie" thread" - just a suggestion but these comments don't belong in this thread, imo.


----------



## wayneL (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> I expect you're right, wayne.  It would be good, however, if we could try to maybe counteract rather than copy the woeful behaviour of those who are supposed to be leading the nation or proposing to do so.




My initial thoughts were that wouldn't be nearly so much fun, but on reflection, "counteraction" is just as much fun at a different level, so, I agree. 

Maybe then the pollies will take OUR lead, if we DO take the lead.


----------



## FlyingFox (22 May 2013)

sails said:


> Joe, can I suggest the off-topic posts in the last 24 hours or so be removed from this thread?  At least twice I posted a poll on the bias of the ABC which got completely swamped in the verbal gunshots.  The argument had nothing to do with the ABC - might have started off that way but ended up nothing to do with it.
> 
> I logged in later in the evening and what I saw  a very out of character frenzied gang like attack on MrBurns.  I stepped in to give him support but couldn't believe the rudeness, nit picking and hair splitting that was going on.  I think this whole miserable and unnecessary show of nastiness should be wiped off, imo.
> 
> ...




Again I apologise if I have offended anyone. I said before that I will refrain from posting and I will do so. However I think given the posts that have come since, I should at least try to defend myself.

Firstly sails, Mr Burns and  Calliope; if you think I have personally attacked you, I apologise. But please show me a post where you think I have done so.

More importantly and on topic. If you assume left view is Labor +Greens and right is coalition and ignoring others, than the responses were
                      Fairfax              New Ltd            ABC
Left                 75.4%              73.2%              73.2%
Right               19.8%              19.8%              14.7%              


I am happy to provide stats, odds ratios and p-values given time. But I see no bias (left vs right) in those numbers. Also if we go by your premise, than both the major media companies should be equally biased.


----------



## Joe Blow (22 May 2013)

sails said:


> Joe, can I suggest the off-topic posts in the last 24 hours or so be removed from this thread?  At least twice I posted a poll on the bias of the ABC which got completely swamped in the verbal gunshots.  The argument had nothing to do with the ABC - might have started off that way but ended up nothing to do with it.




I will review the thread a little later this evening and tidy it up a little.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

sails said:


> EDIT - Joe, if posts are removed from here and you don't want them deleted, one suggestion is to shift them to the "carbon tax lie" thread" - just a suggestion but these comments don't belong in this thread, imo.




While I think this is a good idea, and I pondered creating a thread about opinions and facts, can I ask that any thread be given a neutral name? i.e. "Carbon Tax". If someone is complaining about the ABC not including "No" in a survey about work choices, I fail to see how adding yet another loaded thread title helps. It has no bearing on the validity of it being a lie, type of lie, whatever, and that can be discussed accordingly. But I for one would like to see more neutral names in most threads.


----------



## DB008 (22 May 2013)

There was an article in todays Sydney Telegraph about this.

Very interesting.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

Julia said:


> Apart from some of the ABC journalists themselves, I don't think there would be too many people who didn't agree that there is clear Left bias in some ABC programs.  Just as there is a clear Right bias in "The Australian".
> Why there is so much resentment directed toward the ABC in this respect is probably because it's a taxpayer funded organisation and charged with the responsibility of providing balanced commentary.




What did you think about the observation that there were more identified with the intention of voting ALP at news limited than the ABC. Given that the assertion that was being made was that voting intention is correlated with left wing bias in the ABC, how would you reconcile that with a greater result in "The Australian"/news limited with a clear right bias?


----------



## MrBurns (22 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> What did you think about the observation that there were more identified with the intention of voting ALP at news limited than the ABC. Given that the assertion that was being made was that voting intention is correlated with left wing bias in the ABC, how would you reconcile that with a greater result in "The Australian"/news limited with a clear right bias?




I think journalists have a good sense of humour and saw that poll as an opportunity.


----------



## banco (22 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> What did you think about the observation that there were more identified with the intention of voting ALP at news limited than the ABC. Given that the assertion that was being made was that voting intention is correlated with left wing bias in the ABC, how would you reconcile that with a greater result in "The Australian"/news limited with a clear right bias?




It's more of a leftist bias than a bias for any political party per se.  The ABC institutionally is to the left of the ALP on most social issues (gay marriage, abortion, refugees etc.).  They are considerably more balanced when it comes to economic issues.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

banco said:


> It's more of a leftist bias than a bias for any political party per se.  The ABC institutionally is to the left of the ALP on most social issues (gay marriage, abortion, refugees etc.).  They are considerably more balanced when it comes to economic issues.




Where on the bias scale would you rate News Ltd with regard to gay marriage and abortion?


----------



## banco (22 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Where on the bias scale would you rate News Ltd with regard to gay marriage and abortion?




I don't think they take strong stands on either of those issues.  The Australian is more concerned with economics.  But then they aren't taxpayer funded so it's irrelevant.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

banco said:


> I don't think they take strong stands on either of those issues.  The Australian is more concerned with economics.  But then they aren't taxpayer funded so it's irrelevant.




Your thoughts on the following concept?

"A person with substantially right/left wing bias in their world view will potentially identify centre or neutral positions as right/left wing biased positions without necessarily being aware that they are judging said position relative to their own"


----------



## banco (22 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Your thoughts on the following concept?
> 
> "A person with substantially right/left wing bias in their world view will potentially identify centre or neutral positions as right/left wing biased positions without necessarily being aware that they are judging said position relative to their own"




You've got me.  The ABC is actually middle of the road and I can't see it because I'm an Andrew Bolt clone.


----------



## Some Dude (22 May 2013)

A hypothetical.

If someone (partly) disagrees with an accepted mindset about the ABC and said bias, and they don't think that those who disagree with them are Andrew Bolt clone's, how would you approach that discussion with the perspective of trying to ascertain *how* people reach their conclusions about said bias?


----------



## Joe Blow (22 May 2013)

OK, I have reviewed the thread and don't feel that the exchange that occurred last night was as bad as some people think. I only saw one post that I felt was deserving of being removed. The rest of the conversation was just two groups of people talking past each other who simply couldn't "agree to disagree". Most of the posts that were removed were posted tonight, and the reason they were removed is because they were off topic and getting far too personal.

Trouble starts when people stop debating a topic and start hurling accusations at one another. Tonight someone tried to bring up something that had been posted in another thread some time ago in an attempt to bait someone else. This was removed as it served no purpose other than to provoke. This is the sort of stuff that drags threads off topic and starts slanging matches.

There is a case for moving some posts to a carbon tax thread but there is also a case for leaving them right where they are, as the debate was focused on bias in the media. The only posts that jump out at me as needing to be moved are the ones that deal with moderation here at ASF, and I will find an alternate home for them and move them across to another thread shortly.

Folks, please resist the temptation to make the debate personal. This is where things always begin to go wrong and threads turn nasty. Debate the topic all night long, but do not start attacking each other. If you feel no progress it being made and you can't find any common ground, please consider just walking away from the debate. Sometimes people are just not going to agree, and that is not unusual when it comes to political discussions. State your case, make your rebuttals, and if you find yourself going around in circles again and again just walk away or shift your focus to another thread where the discussion/debate is more constructive.

Now, let's get this thread back on topic. I sincerely hope that the debate can now move forward in a civil and constructive way. Would anyone care to kick things off again?


----------



## Some Dude (23 May 2013)

I would like to start with a question.

People often refer to what they believe is obvious ABC bias. How do people determine this?

We will all be able to point to instances and say that is biased but I think the real question is how do we determine whether what we notice is indicative of systemtic bias with an outlet like the ABC, situational and not indicative of a wider bias, whether it is something within ourselves that we are projecting from disagreement, or whether we hold views that are so biased in comparison to the rest of the community that an outlet providing a balanced position appears biased. I believe that everyone is subject to these, the only difference between people is whether they are aware of them and do they seek to mitigate them.

I believe that all outlets have bias and that further, it is inevitable. At best, it can be minimised but no outlet will ever be unbiased. As such, on the whole, I think the ABC does a pretty amazing job. My opinion is developed from available studies, finding myself agreeing and disagreeing with stories, a genuine complaints process, and studies or reports that indicate that the ABC is biased to the ALP, to the Coalition, and relatively neutral. It appears to me that no side has a slam dunk case to say that the ABC is biased one way or the other in a systemic manner.

How do you develop your perspective about whether the ABC is biased or not?


----------



## Calliope (23 May 2013)

You have to give credit to the ABC, they make no attempt to conceal their left wing bias...they openly flaunt it'.




> THE ABC has named *senior Fairfax journalist Russell Skelton* as the editor of its new fact checking unit ... head of current affairs Bruce Belsham (said) "*The ABC news division is delighted to attract to this position a journalist with Russell's reputation for accuracy and integrity."*
> *
> Is that a fact? Skelton tweets, May 15:
> 
> ...



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...n-checking-facts/story-fn72xczz-1226648713068


----------



## Some Dude (23 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> You have to give credit to the ABC, they make no attempt to conceal their left wing bias...they openly flaunt it'.




Since when has a scientific position, and the analysis of said position regardless of perspective about the veracity of the analysis referred to, been a left or right wing bias issue?


----------



## Calliope (23 May 2013)

The ABC manages to put out a long article on the London terrorist attack without mentioning the word Muslim once.
They did mention however that;



> 100 angry supporters of the English Defence League, *a far-right street protest group*, took to the streets, some wearing balaclavas and carrying the English flag




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-...-in-suspected-london-terrorist-attack/4707506


----------



## MrBurns (23 May 2013)

Calliope said:


> The ABC manages to put out a long article on the London terrorist attack without mentioning the word Muslim once.
> They did mention however that;
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-...-in-suspected-london-terrorist-attack/4707506




Yes unlike most others who report it as it is - 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/22/world/europe/uk-london-attack/index.html

http://world.time.com/2013/05/22/man-hacked-to-death-in-suspected-terrorist-attack-in-london/

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...-death-in-suspected-london-terror-attack?lite


----------



## McLovin (23 May 2013)

Funnily enough, all the sources have only inferred they attacker was Muslim, including the ABC. None have expressly identified them as such, probably because they don't know if they were sane. Kind of like the guy in Canada a few years ago who beheaded the guy next to him on a bus because "God" told him to. Obviously he was a lunatic and it had nothing to do with him being Christian.


----------



## Ijustnewit (26 May 2013)

A classic example of this thread today , most other news sites are reporting the arrival of another 3 boats in the last 24hrs carrying 208 asylum seekers. But alas no such reports can be found anywhere on the ABC News website.
Instead they choose to run the stories of how Gillard is intervening in live betting odds and other Labor feelgood stories about ideas they have for Aboriginal referendums.


----------



## Some Dude (26 May 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> A classic example of this thread today , most other news sites are reporting the arrival of another 3 boats in the last 24hrs carrying 208 asylum seekers. But alas no such reports can be found anywhere on the ABC News website.
> Instead they choose to run the stories of how Gillard is intervening in live betting odds and other Labor feelgood stories about ideas they have for Aboriginal referendums.




Goto the Australian section of Google news which draws it's news from most news outlets and tell me how many you find.

Hint... 0...


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Goto the Australian section of Google news which draws it's news from most news outlets and tell me how many you find.
> 
> Hint... 0...




You are spot on, all I could find was this.

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news...m-seekers-in-may/story-fni0xqrc-1226646266884

I thought the $2000 bribe to go home could probably be open to scamming, but hey I'm a cynic.


----------



## sails (26 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> You are spot on, all I could find was this.
> 
> http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news...m-seekers-in-may/story-fni0xqrc-1226646266884
> 
> I thought the $2000 bribe to go home could probably be open to scamming, but hey I'm a cynic.




Even if the other media isn't reporting it, the ABC should.  They are supposed to represent ALL Australians.


----------



## Some Dude (26 May 2013)

sails said:


> Even if the other media isn't reporting it, the ABC should.  They are supposed to represent ALL Australians.




So why not point to the media in general instead of just one element if you believe that wider coverage should have been given. I'd suggest that the expectation of coverage is the issue in much the same way that people are asking why so much coverage is being given to the girl at the sports game in another thread.

Representing ALL Australians doesn't mean just those who want to see wall to wall coverage on this particular issue.


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> So why not point to the media in general instead of just one element if you believe that wider coverage should have been given. I'd suggest that the expectation of coverage is the issue in much the same way that people are asking why so much coverage is being given to the girl at the sports game in another thread.
> 
> Representing ALL Australians doesn't mean just those who want to see wall to wall coverage on this particular issue.




Yes it would be nice to have a news channel. Not just channels that put their own bent on news.

It's a bit like the guy who used to be on spicks and specks, Adam Hills, he's supposed to be a commedian.

The problem is, you know he is going to get political, so it is hard to focus on the comedy. You're waiting for the political presentation to start.


----------



## Some Dude (26 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Yes it would be nice to have a news channel. Not just channels that put their own bent on news.




Heh.. I really hear you there. I often listen/read/whatever the news and walk away sighing, only to come on places like here where most people are ranting about the left/right/whatever bias on the news and I am left wondering whether we are all consuming the same news or not.

Just keeps me wondering about that old perception chestnut.


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Heh.. I really hear you there. I often listen/read/whatever the news and walk away sighing, only to come on places like here where most people are ranting about the left/right/whatever bias on the news and I am left wondering whether we are all consuming the same news or not.
> 
> Just keeps me wondering about that old perception chestnut.




Yes it's a bit like listening to the early morning news on the radio.
It starts at 6am with hundreds killed in mass pile up.
Then at 7am it is a serious accident that may involve fatalities.
Then at 8am it is a broken down truck on the freeway causing a traffic holdup.
Thankfully it in the majority of cases it turns out to be a non event.

My wife is the ultimate cynic of the 'news' she always storms off ranting "it is garbage".


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2013)

Talk about political, get your head around this.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/in-t...s-tell-true-deficit-story-20130524-2k70m.html
Three things I would say is:
1. It is the responsibility of the encumbered government to adjust tax requirements to reflect budget constraints.
2. After six years, to still say the government hasn't adjusted the tax base and it's the previous governments problem, is dumb.
3. Apparently they don't include the stimulus throw away spending as part of the government debt, I'm sure I read that it is annexed and not included.


----------



## Some Dude (27 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Talk about political, get your head around this.




Setting aside for the moment whether we agree or not (mixed bag) about the contents, when you indicate that this article is political, are you saying that it is propaganda, biased, or something else? I'm trying to understand the difference between you thinking he is wrong or incompetent, and "political" which seems to have a subtext.


----------



## sptrawler (27 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Setting aside for the moment whether we agree or not (mixed bag) about the contents, when you indicate that this article is political, are you saying that it is propaganda, biased, or something else? I'm trying to understand the difference between you thinking he is wrong or incompetent, and "political" which seems to have a subtext.



The whole thrust of the article, IMO, is to lay the blame for the state of the economy at the feet of Costello and his tax cuts.
It is a governments responsibility, to collect the taxes required to supply the serevices required. If it takes more tax reciepts than it spends it runs a surplus, if there are no obvious infrastructure or social issues that require extra funding. 
Then it is the governments responsibilty to to reduce the tax it takes, not just spend it because it can.
If the previous government had continued to just build bigger and bigger surpluses all sectors would be screaming and rightly so. 
Therein lies the difference, this government has not changed its attitude to reflect the budgetry situation it continually found itself in. In fact it still hasn't, it is still splashing it round, yet Gittens would have us believe the current team have just had bad luck.
I'm afraid I can't subscribe to that belief and to my way of thinking shows Gittens either has a political adjenda or has a weird reporting style.


----------



## Some Dude (27 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I'm afraid I can't subscribe to that belief and to my way of thinking shows Gittens either has a political adjenda or has a weird reporting style.




I think this is a very sensible and simple (not in the bad way) dichotomy of ways to represent potential groups for those who disgaree/dislike/<insert whatever> what Ross Gittens wrote.

Using that as a context i.e. I'm not going to argue the validity or not of what he is saying, do you have any suggestions for how we could ascertain which was more likely?


----------



## sptrawler (27 May 2013)

Some Dude said:


> I think this is a very sensible and simple (not in the bad way) dichotomy of ways to represent potential groups for those who disgaree/dislike/<insert whatever> what Ross Gittens wrote.
> 
> Using that as a context i.e. I'm not going to argue the validity or not of what he is saying, do you have any suggestions for how we could ascertain which was more likely?




It isn't that important, just a personal observation, even Ross can have a bad day. Somewhat like the atrocious spelling in my post.lol I must appologise, this morning wasn't great in my household.

Anyway back to the ABC.


----------



## drsmith (27 May 2013)

On the ABC's Insiders yesterday there was only a brief mention and no discussion on the latest charges against Craig Thomson and there was also the following puff piece for Speaker Anna Burke.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3767492.htm


----------



## MrBurns (27 May 2013)

Have a look at Lateline Emma Alberici interviewing Conroy about the gambling ads during sport issue

Conroy said "massively reduced" that many times I lost count, he's a complete idiot.

He hasn't changed anything much and just would not shut up repetitive BS it was just pathetic.


----------



## Some Dude (28 May 2013)

sptrawler said:


> It isn't that important, just a personal observation, even Ross can have a bad day. Somewhat like the atrocious spelling in my post.lol I must appologise, this morning wasn't great in my household.
> 
> Anyway back to the ABC.




No problem, thanks for the exchange


----------



## drsmith (30 May 2013)

It might be interesting to see where this goes,

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...e-against-abc-factchecker-20130530-2nd68.html


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2013)

With tremors again emanating from the grave of Kevin Rudd's prime-ministerial corpse, I suspect the ABC's Insiders will be more upbeat tomorrow.

This time the epicentre isn't Simon Crean banging the headstone with a shovel hoping for a response from below. This is from deep within in response to the heat from above as the surface burns.


----------



## Calliope (9 June 2013)

drsmith said:


> With tremors again emanating from the grave of Kevin Rudd's prime-ministerial corpse, I suspect the ABC's Insiders will be more upbeat tomorrow.
> 
> This time the epicentre isn't Simon Crean banging the headstone with a shovel hoping for a response from below. This is from deep within in response to the heat from above as the surface burns.




Yes, I thought this morning's show was interesting from the Rudd/Gillard perspective. Cassidy had two Ruddites from the SMH and a Gillardite from Guardian Australia. So the show departed from the usual Gillard/Abbott theme.

Cassidy who is a Labor "insider," is confident that Rudd will lead Labor into the election, but for a smooth takeover, Gillard will have to step aside.

In the Party it is now every man for himself and many think Rudd could save their seats. They are all begging him to campaign in their seats, and to be seen with his adoring supporters.


----------



## drsmith (9 June 2013)

Calliope said:


> Yes, I thought this morning's show was interesting from the Rudd/Gillard perspective. Cassidy had two Ruddites from the SMH and a Gillardite from Guardian Australia. So the show departed from the usual Gillard/Abbott theme.
> 
> Cassidy who is a Labor "insider," is confident that Rudd will lead Labor into the election, but for a smooth takeover, Gillard will have to step aside.
> 
> In the Party it is now every man for himself and many think Rudd could save their seats. They are all begging him to campaign in their seats, and to be seen with his adoring supporters.



Even Christopher Pyne's little slip up over the ABC's 7:30 Kevin Rudd interview didn't rate a mention.

The battle within is obviously more entertaining than the battle across the usual political trenches.


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2013)

> Gillard calls for Brough's head over sexist menu




The ABC has had this front and centre on their web site all day, forget about the abortion diatribe Gillard comes out with forget about the drowned women and children asylum seekers, lets devote the whole web site to a bit of rubbish put together by a non party member.........these bastards need sorting out.


----------



## dutchie (14 June 2013)

From the Andrew Bolt Blog:


Never mind the facts. How the ABC put Tony Abbott on the menu
Andrew Bolt June 14 2013 (7:42am)
Media

Why did the ABC not let the facts get in the way of a good anti-Abbott smear?

Restaurant owner Joe Richards revealed before 7pm on Wednesday that Labor’s claims about the sexist menu “on display” at a Liberal fundraiser held by Mal Brough were false:

    There were never any menus distributed on the tables or in the restaurant. I created a mock menu myself as a light-hearted joke. However as I said, I never produced them for public distribution...I can assure you that no such menu was distributed on the night. As you know, no-one at the dinner was privy to such a menu and it is so unfortunate that an in-house joke between myself and my son has caused you great problems and embarrassment. 

End of story.

Labor was wrong to say the menu was ”on display” at fundraiser, wrong to say it gave guest of honor Joe Hockey ”belly laughs”, wrong to say Brough admitted he’d ”seen” it. And wrong to suggest any like with Tony Abbott.

This story was dead. It had ceased to be. There was nothing left to it but a rude restaurateur and another example of a desperate prime minister desperately smearing.
But observe how the ABC wouldn’t let the truth stop it from pushing along Gillard’s smear:

    While other media outlets chose to report that restaurant owner Joe Richards had mocked-up the menu himself, and that it was seen only by him and his son, the ABC’s Leigh Sales still led her introduction to 7.30 with the “shocking sexist misstep by a prominent Coalition MP”.

    This was despite the 7pm bulletin containing a reference to the new confession at the end of its first item as the news broke.

    Journalist Chris Uhlmann corrected the record 13 minutes into his pre-recorded 7.30 package with a single line before producers continued with a panel segment involving The Australian columnist Janet Albrechtsen and prominent publisher Mia Freedman discussing the issue as if the new revelations had never been made…

    Sales told her guests about it shortly before the [pre-recorded] segment finished filming.

    “We’ve just received word . . . that the owner of the restaurant that was involved in the menu issue has put out a statement saying that it was a mock menu that he made and that it wasn’t distributed on the night at the fundraiser and that it was unfortunate that it ended up going public,” she said.

    “Janet, does that change things?”

    Hours later, Lateline’s Emma Alberici also led the program with the old story.

    “An obscene description of the Prime Minister’s body on a menu at a Liberal Party fundraiser has further fuelled the so-called gender wars,” she opened. Halfway through the report, political correspondent Tom Iggulden used the new information to segue back into the pre-set piece about the menu being a Coalition problem…

    But it was persistent and misleading tweets from the ABC’s Latika Bourke which contributed to confusion about the timeline.

    She initially tweeted on Wednesday “the offensive Liberal menu is real” after talking to Mal Brough but he told The Australian she did not accurately portray what he had told her.

    He said he told her he was aware of the existence of the menu because Joe Hockey’s office had phoned him about 9am Wednesday - after news broke online...

The ABC should explain this appalling performance.

And Julia Gillard should explain why she’s still making false claims to appear the victim of Liberal sexism. This is the real story:

    LABOR’S two-day gender offensive against Tony Abbott continued to unravel yesterday as supporters of Julia Gillard failed to produce any evidence to back claims a derogatory menu had been distributed at a Liberal National Party fundraiser.

    As the man who first alerted the world to the existence of the menu - a disgruntled former worker at Brisbane’s R&R Cafe - admitted he had no firsthand knowledge it ever left the kitchen, the emergence of a second worker who claimed it had been widely seen at the LNP dinner in March appeared to be a hoax.


----------



## MrBurns (14 June 2013)

dutchie said:


> From the Andrew Bolt Blog:
> 
> 
> Never mind the facts. How the ABC put Tony Abbott on the menu
> ...




Bolt is right, why do we have to put up with this BS from Labor , their only function now is smear and attack to try to get votes, no ones running Australia at present the whole Labor Govt is high farce.


----------



## Julia (14 June 2013)

This week, when we might have thought the political landscape could not get more debased, we have had two utterly offensive pieces of 'humour' designed to humiliate the leaders of our two main parties.

First, the recycled Chicken 'menu' insulting Julia Gillard which allegedly never made it out of the kitchen of the restaurant involved.

Second, the revolting cartoon by Michael Leunig which was proudly published by The Age for the whole nation to see, expressing quite pathetic insults toward Tony Abbott's genitalia.

In the first instance, the ABC, both on radio and television has given saturation coverage to the distress caused Ms Gillard,  this even extending to a segment on the prestigious and widely watched "7.30"
Even this evening, in the local Qld 7.30 program the ubiquitous Clive Palmer was encouraged to offer a rerun of the horror of the chicken menu.

But has there been even a mention, the slightest whisper of comment, let alone outrage, about the disgusting personal abuse directed toward Tony Abbott on any part of the ABC Network?  Not that I've heard or seen.

Anyone still up for claiming the ABC is not politically biased?


----------



## MrBurns (14 June 2013)

Julia said:


> But has there been even a mention, the slightest whisper of comment, let alone outrage, about the disgusting personal abuse directed toward Tony Abbott on any part of the ABC Network?  Not that I've heard or seen.
> 
> Anyone still up for claiming the ABC is not politically biased?




Yes Julia, the ABC is now aware of an impending disaster for the ALP and is moving to minimise it.

Amongst all this is there any thought for what really matters, asylum seekers drowning and a myriad of other problems, no nothing on that just fluff and spin.


----------



## sails (14 June 2013)

Julia said:


> This week, when we might have thought the political landscape could not get more debased, we have had two utterly offensive pieces of 'humour' designed to humiliate the leaders of our two main parties.
> 
> First, the recycled Chicken 'menu' insulting Julia Gillard which allegedly never made it out of the kitchen of the restaurant involved.
> 
> ...





The comparison on how Gillard and Abbott respectively handled their "menus" is very telling, imo.  As insulting and crude as it was, Abbott simply lets it go through to the keeper whilst Gillard (via an ever obliging media) keeps up the victim carry-on for news report after news report.  Unbelievable for a PM.  What damage is she doing for the cause of professional women?

And then we have a poster on another thread saying how hard done by Gillard is...


----------



## ChrisJH (15 June 2013)

Julia said:


> This week, when we might have thought the political landscape could not get more debased, we have had two utterly offensive pieces of 'humour' designed to humiliate the leaders of our two main parties.
> 
> First, the recycled Chicken 'menu' insulting Julia Gillard which allegedly never made it out of the kitchen of the restaurant involved.
> 
> ...




I'm not sure I fully understand your outrage, Julia? The Leunig cartoon was clearly a topical response (as such Newspaper cartoons are) to the inane political issue of that small period. The Leunig cartoon was, quite obviously, in response to the entirely absurd menu beatup; what would you have the ABC do? Respond to every little mundane political response? A response to a response to a response? Surely you don't deem responding to a Leunig cartoon in a newspaper as major news worthy?

Lets be honest, here. Although it shouldn't have been, the whole Gillard-Menu affair became nationally covered news. Should major news outlets really have been publishing major stories, "The Age has published a Michael Leunig Comic about Tony Abbott"? I don't think so.

If I'm not mistaken, Leunig comics are published in the opinion section of The Age? Not as news, but as to accompany the selected letters sent in by readers?


----------



## Aussiejeff (15 June 2013)

ChrisJH said:


> I'm not sure I fully understand your outrage, Julia? The Leunig cartoon was clearly a topical response (as such Newspaper cartoons are) to the inane political issue of that small period. The Leunig cartoon was, quite obviously, in response to the entirely absurd menu beatup; what would you have the ABC do? Respond to every little mundane political response? A response to a response to a response? Surely you don't deem responding to a Leunig cartoon in a newspaper as major news worthy?
> 
> Lets be honest, here. Although it shouldn't have been, the whole Gillard-Menu affair became nationally covered news. Should major news outlets really have been publishing major stories, "The Age has published a Michael Leunig Comic about Tony Abbott"? I don't think so.
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, Leunig comics are published in the opinion section of The Age? Not as news, but as to accompany the selected letters sent in by readers?




I hope you are not suggesting the leftist rAge is a non-biased news outlet? The left-leanings of that rag are well known. I'm willing to bet more swill spills from it's pink pages before the election debacle comes home to roost.

On topic, the ABC is setting itself up for a mighty big cut post election by ramping up the anti-liberal BS as IT'S TIME draws nearer.


----------



## IFocus (15 June 2013)

Well looks like the world is completely against you lot led by the left wing commie party political propaganda unit ..........the "ABC" hilarious.

Its all just a grand conspiracy next they will want to take your guns...........LOL


----------



## drsmith (15 June 2013)

I don't think the ABC's worried about anyone's guns.

Barrie Cassidy's inside tips on the whereabouts of Labor's kitchen knives will see the ABC well and truly occupied for a while.


----------



## Bintang (15 June 2013)

ChrisJH said:


> I'm not sure I fully understand your outrage, Julia? The Leunig cartoon was clearly a topical response (as such Newspaper cartoons are) to the inane political issue of that small period. The Leunig cartoon was, quite obviously, in response to the entirely absurd menu beatup; what would you have the ABC do? Respond to every little mundane political response? A response to a response to a response? Surely you don't deem responding to a Leunig cartoon in a newspaper as major news worthy?




I think a fundamental problem is that for the last 20-30 years or so we have all been beaten up so much by political correctness that few people can have a good laugh anymore.
If I was Abbot I would just laugh of the Leunig cartoon.
If I was Gillard I would have laughed off the menu affair.
And maybe the ABC should relegate these kind of stories to a comedy hour and reserve the News slot for real news.


----------



## bellenuit (15 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> If I was Gillard I would have laughed off the menu affair.




I'm quite sure Gillard laughed all the way to her political strategist McTernan when she heard of the menu. It wasn't political correctness that made her and her ministers come out with feigned offence taking, but a deliberate ploy to use the menu as a means to attack Abbott and his team. She doesn't care two hoots about PC.  She even used her deceased father again when attacking Abbott, when Abbott didn't actually say anything about her father, but made the mistake a few months back of using the expression "died of shame" in an unrelated context when it had been used a few weeks before by Alan Jones, who was speaking about Gillard's father.

If the media was really reporting facts, they should be highlighting the fact that it was not Gillard who was offensively treated last week, but Abbott. Abbott did absolutely nothing but was heaped on by Labor and the left leaning press. It was not Abbott who publicised the offensive menu, but the Labor Party machine. If not for them, it would have remained, as Abbott said, in the kitchen.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 June 2013)

IFocus said:


> Well looks like the world is completely against you lot led by the left wing commie party political propaganda unit ..........the "ABC" hilarious.
> 
> Its all just a grand conspiracy next they will want to take your guns...........LOL




Yes I agree IFocus. Hilarious.

I was listening to the radio and they asked what the listeners thought. About 5 guys rang in and said it was no big deal and about 4 women rang in and were upset. Depends on your viewpoint I guess. I suppose if you are a women you should just expect to be told regularly if your t1ts aren't up to scratch and your bum is big, not too mention the "red" bit. If someone found out that Abbott was cursed with tiny genitals then that would be fair too. 

I saw an article today about *International reporters doing stories on us.*

They can't believe what they have found. The army porno squad, the attack on the Prime Ministers genitals, the Socceroo's coach saying women should shut up, the interview with the Prime Minister, the nasty cartoon by Pickering. The English are saying we are the most uncultured lot since the prison ships came in.

Can't they see it is harmless?


----------



## sails (16 June 2013)

Hmmm Knobby - who is actually causing the fuss?

Here is Gillard in action - is she completely delusional?  Who is the ugliest of them all in this clip?

I bet this stuff doesn't get reported overseas - just her made-up accusations about the opposition being misogynists - but the likes of Slipper and Sandilands are ok in her books (she said she would call it if she saw it - seems she calls it when it suits her - whether it's factual or not doesn't seem to matter).

She might be getting her twisted stuff believed overseas, but thankfully Aussies are waking up!




Hypocrisy alert:  Gillard abuses politicians’ looks


----------



## MrBurns (16 June 2013)

sails said:


> Hmmm Knobby - who is actually causing the fuss?
> 
> Here is Gillard in action - is she completely delusional?  Who is the ugliest of them all in this clip?
> 
> ...




She's horrid, I hope I see her in person one day so I can tell her what I think..............probably better I don't.


----------



## Bintang (16 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She's horrid, I hope I see her in person one day so I can tell her what I think..............probably better I don't.




Just send her a link to ASF


----------



## Bintang (16 June 2013)

sails said:


> Hmmm Knobby - who is actually causing the fuss?
> 
> Here is Gillard in action - is she completely delusional?  Who is the ugliest of them all in this clip?
> 
> ...





That video makes it pretty damned obvious that Julia Gillard was displaying her PM potential as far back as 2006.
PM = Prime Misandrist


----------



## noco (16 June 2013)

I hear there is a new ABC 'CHICKEN MENU' coming out after the 14 th September.

It is called 'LEFT WINGS AND BUMS WITH GINGER BREAD' which, I understand for political reasons, will be disposed of in a very appropriate manner before reaching the restaurant tables.

There will also be many new red and green feather dusters available in Canberra at the same time.

I think a better terminology might be known as a ' COALITION ETHNIC CLEANSING'.


----------



## Logique (16 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She's horrid, I hope I see her in person one day so I can tell her what I think..............probably better I don't.



Horrid...an interesting usage. Once used by the Royals to describe Cherie Blair. Unfairly to her I thought.

It is not anger, but pity that I feel for our PM. Peter Slipper also comes to mind in the following context.


> http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/29450.html
> He who blinded by ambition, raises himself to a position whence he cannot mount higher, must thereafter fall with the greatest loss.
> Niccolo Machiavelli
> Italian dramatist, historian, & philosopher (1469 - 1527)


----------



## Knobby22 (16 June 2013)

Very apt quote Logique.
I'll have to remember it.


----------



## Julia (16 June 2013)

I haven't watched "The Insiders" for many months, having become bored and fed up with its biased commentary.
However, due to the extraordinary week we've just seen I did see most of it today, and have to say there were actually some objective comments (read criticisms) about Ms Gillard's silly "Gillard for Women"/Abortion/Wipe out of Women in Parliament" speech.

It actually seemed to have fallen as flat with Malcolm Farr and Lenore Taylor as with most of the rest of the commentariat.

Then Barrie Cassidy subjected Peter Garrett to some pretty rigorous questioning on Gonski.

The above observation is in direct contrast to the Radio National segment "The Outsiders" with Jonathan Green, whose guests today were Eva Cox, Bernard Keane and Grace Collier, i.e. all essentially Left leaning.
The subject was (who'd have guessed it!) sexism directed toward the Prime Minister.  It was all very predictable until Grace Collier objected to the non-critical, non-objective sympathy toward Ms Gillard and had the temerity to speak out.  She was rubbished for this, of course.

But the main point is that here we have this Left group lamenting sexism, yet referring to women's breasts as "t1ts".   Hardly respectful is it?


----------



## Macquack (16 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She's horrid, *I hope I see her in person one day *so I can tell her what I think..............*probably better I don't*.




I also hope you see Gillard in person one day, and that she has read all the grossly derogative, downright rude and obnoxious comments you have written about her. I would pay to watch her deck you.


----------



## MrBurns (16 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> I also hope you see Gillard in person one day, and that she has read all the grossly derogative, downright rude and obnoxious comments you have written about her. I would pay to watch her deck you.




Oh no not you again, get lost Macquack...


----------



## drsmith (16 June 2013)

No one will have to pay to watch Kevin Rudd politically deck Julia Gillard.


----------



## noco (22 June 2013)

Former ABC Chairman Maurice Newman has his say on the ABC bias towards climate change.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...-right-questions/story-fni0ffxg-1226666505528


----------



## Ijustnewit (27 June 2013)

Auntie ABC is doing handstands today. They have dragged up every story and person they can to say Rudd will win the election. They are celebrating as if the election is already over and Labor is back for another 5 years. 
I had to laugh when they crossed live to Rudds electoral office. Waiting for someone that had just gone into Rudd's office was a woman in a car. They were parked in the disabled zone when the woman opened the door of the car put her legs out then proceeded to light a ciggie and drag on it like it was her last breath.
It was like a skit from Little Britain. :


----------



## drsmith (29 June 2013)

It's not the ABC, but I hope Ch7's Sunrise crew are as tough on Labor on asylum seekers as they tried to be on Julie Bishop this morning,

http://au.tv.yahoo.com/sunrise/video/watch/17796344/julie-bishop-on-rudds-return/


----------



## So_Cynical (30 June 2013)

drsmith said:


> It's not the ABC, but I hope Ch7's Sunrise crew are as tough on Labor on asylum seekers as they tried to be on Julie Bishop this morning,
> 
> http://au.tv.yahoo.com/sunrise/video/watch/17796344/julie-bishop-on-rudds-return/




I have noticed before that Andrew O'Keefe isn't a right wing nutter or a political agnostic like the usual (Mon-Fri) Sunrise crew is...doesn't let the right get away with blatant lies, the word "war"


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> I have noticed before that Andrew O'Keefe isn't a right wing nutter or a political agnostic like the usual (Mon-Fri) Sunrise crew is...doesn't let the right get away with blatant lies, the word "war"



Regardless of whatever distinction you wish to draw between conflict and war, Kevin Rudd referred to a specific war in his statement.


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 July 2013)

Oh gawd, the lefty bias of the ABC was in overdrive last night on Q & A. "Let's all bash Sophie" was the theme of the   program apparently as one after another of the guest speakers put the boot in as soon as she tried to speak.

As soon as she spoke about the nasty mysoginistic crap that Labor members have thrown _her_ way during Parliament, they all shut up and merely looked sheepish, grinning stupidly. Not one acknowledgement that they sympathised at all with her humiliation (oh, she's Liberal, she can cop it?). Yet they had ranted the "JuLiar suffered so bad from mysoginism" line all night long up to that point, and even after.

That moron Tony Jones kept hammering "Why won't Tony Abbott come on this show?" to which Sophie replied "I believe you asked Mr Rudd to come on too but he also declined?" - to which the chorus led by a sneering, venemous Plibersek went up "Oh, but we want to hear all _your_ policies - come on - tell us all".

What? Go on a show where the lighting is RED, the background decore is blood RED and all the opposing guests, plus most of the audience (I never believe the faux voter split at the start of that show) and even the host are painted bright RED? To be humiliated while they all cackle like maniacs every time you - the sole conservative representative on the show - go to speak?

WTF? I'm just glad my local Fed member Sophie held her head up during that farce of a show. She sure as hell is gonna get MY vote next go I get. To think I actually swung and voted for Rudd first time around. Labor have lost me for the foreseeable future with this lot of goons.

I knew it would be bad after the ABC's Messiah Rudd rose to save their souls again, but really.....that BIASS... I'm beginning to hear Latham's quote of "E-e-v-i-l-" ringing in my head now....


----------



## bigdog (2 July 2013)

Great cartoon form Michael
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/


----------



## noco (2 July 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Oh gawd, the lefty bias of the ABC was in overdrive last night on Q & A. "Let's all bash Sophie" was the theme of the   program apparently as one after another of the guest speakers put the boot in as soon as she tried to speak.
> 
> As soon as she spoke about the nasty mysoginistic crap that Labor members have thrown _her_ way during Parliament, they all shut up and merely looked sheepish, grinning stupidly. Not one acknowledgement that they sympathised at all with her humiliation (oh, she's Liberal, she can cop it?). Yet they had ranted the "JuLiar suffered so bad from mysoginism" line all night long up to that point, and even after.
> 
> ...




+ 1. I noticed every time Jones thought Sophie was winning a point, he would say well that is enough we will move on now to the next question from the lady up the back.


----------



## Ijustnewit (2 July 2013)

noco said:


> + 1. I noticed every time Jones thought Sophie was winning a point, he would say well that is enough we will move on now to the next question from the lady up the back.



Yes last night's Q&A was a farce and a stitch up. The ABC has been on a Rudd rampage since he has been back. Even ABC NEWS 24 has every second story or a guest talking up Rudd and bagging the Libs at every turn.
Last nights Media Watch was the same letting fly at every newspaper or media outlet that said anything untowards Gillard. The show was aimed directly at the Papers, blaming them for her demise.
Unfortunately it's not going to change anytime soon , and they wonder why Abbott won't appear on the network. Can you blame him ?


----------



## boofhead (2 July 2013)

If Sophie was a little smarter in how she answered she would better get the point across. She comes across a little too agressive/attacking at times. She was a little better controlled than past appearances but she has a habit of wanting to talk over people. Compare her to George Brandis - even the left biased people will listen to him and give him a fair go. Sophie didn't do a good job of explaining why Abbott won't do a live debate with Rudd (or Gillard in the past) on the economy. It merely reinforced the view that Abbott is on a leesh and can't think too well on his feet.

Do you really expect Rudd to appear after what just happened? I dare say it is a busy time for him - he didn't manage to tell the ex-sports minister she has been moved. Gillard appeared on the show. When was Abbott last on it?

The right need more speakers like Brandis. Appears calm, intelligent and doesn't have the implicit condescension of others. Compare him to Joyce.


----------



## Julia (2 July 2013)

boofhead said:


> The right need more speakers like Brandis. Appears calm, intelligent and doesn't have the implicit condescension of others. Compare him to Joyce.



Agree.  Sensible comments, boofhead. 
I haven't yet seen last night's Q & A, but have never found Sophie Mirabella to be much of a spokesperson for the Coalition.  She seems to entirely lack the capacity to present her view in a clear and concise way.


----------



## Calliope (2 July 2013)

boofhead said:


> If Sophie was a little smarter in how she answered she would better get the point across. She comes across a little too agressive/attacking at times. She was a little better controlled than past appearances but she has a habit of wanting to talk over people.




She can get down in the gutter and debate the Labor women at their own level. As for talking over people, all the panel and Tony Jones attacked and talked over her.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Yes last night's Q&A was a farce and a stitch up. The ABC has been on a Rudd rampage since he has been back. Even ABC NEWS 24 has every second story or a guest talking up Rudd and bagging the Libs at every turn.
> Last nights Media Watch was the same letting fly at every newspaper or media outlet that said anything untowards Gillard. The show was aimed directly at the Papers, blaming them for her demise.
> Unfortunately it's not going to change anytime soon , and they wonder why Abbott won't appear on the network. Can you blame him ?



I took one look at the list of participants and didn't watch Q&A last night.

I also note on the ABC's Insider's program this week the twist the ABC put on Senator Cash's dig in the Senate at Labor  sisterhood over the termination of Julia Gillard's leadership. There, it was portrayed along the lines of panic within the Opposition over Labor restoring Kevin Rudd as PM and didn't show the point of order that led to her response.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...20515&page=389&p=781211&viewfull=1#post781211

I also note that it was Insiders host Barrie Cassidy who two weeks ago gave all the media sharks the big feed on Julia Gillard's prospects as Labor leader.


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 July 2013)

Julia said:


> Agree.  Sensible comments, boofhead.
> *I haven't yet seen last night's Q & A*, but have never found Sophie Mirabella to be much of a spokesperson for the Coalition.  She seems to entirely lack the capacity to present her view in a clear and concise way.




Hi Julia,

Then you just need to watch this ABC inspired grab...note the luvly RED decor. Appropriate for the occasion. It never seems to be blue decor. Wonder why? 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-02/tanya-plibersek-and-sophie-mirabella-in-heated/4793152


----------



## Julia (2 July 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hi Julia,
> 
> Then you just need to watch this ABC inspired grab...note the luvly RED decor. Appropriate for the occasion. It never seems to be blue decor. Wonder why?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-02/tanya-plibersek-and-sophie-mirabella-in-heated/4793152



Thanks for the link, Aussiejeff.  I take your point about the dominance of the red in that clip.  Not sure if I were just watching the program whether I'd attach any significance to it, but for sure a more neutral colour would be way more appropriate.

Agree also that the giggling and tittering was rude.  But I just can't see Ms Mirabella as at all competent.
She doesn't present as having her thoughts organised or with any authority imo, unlike George Brandis who calmly and incisively comes up with an appropriate response every time.  Just my opinion, but I think Sophie Mirabella is a liability for the Coalition.


----------



## Logique (2 July 2013)

Amazingly, the Insiders audience always works out to be 50% 2pp. Genius from the program's researchers. 

Yet somehow it's the (usually) lone conservative who is jeered at throughout. Who'd have thought?

More fine programming from (not your) ABC. 

Ha ha, Tanya Plibersek..yeah Sisters..high five!


----------



## springhill (2 July 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hi Julia,
> 
> Then you just need to watch this ABC inspired grab...note the luvly RED decor. Appropriate for the occasion. It never seems to be blue decor. Wonder why?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-02/tanya-plibersek-and-sophie-mirabella-in-heated/4793152




Tony jumped in the line of that last bullet for Tanya didn't he? That was the kill shot right there.

Spohie M "If Julia Gillard's record was so good why did you get rid of her.....?"

Tony J "OK, we will leave that rhetorical ......."

That question was not rhetorical, Tony. How pathetically gutless to shield Plibersek from a straight up question.


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 July 2013)

springhill said:


> Tony jumped in the line of that last bullet for Tanya didn't he? That was the kill shot right there.
> 
> Spohie M "If Julia Gillard's record was so good why did you get rid of her.....?"
> 
> ...




Yep, da House of ABC was positively oozing with Labor biass. How can a supposedly non-partisan National Public broadcaster be allowed to get away with this drivel & $hite?

More un-ashamed perverted bashing of Abbott here...http://www.news.com.au/national-new...y-abbotts-mother/story-fnii5qqu-1226673193098


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2013)

springhill said:


> Tony jumped in the line of that last bullet for Tanya didn't he? That was the kill shot right there.
> 
> Spohie M "If Julia Gillard's record was so good why did you get rid of her.....?"
> 
> ...



I thought the same thing. Tony Jones just didn't want a bar of it. Like Kevin Rudd, he wants to forget the past.

With the above in mind, the last bit of the show is well worth listening to. Sophie throws his own line back at him.


----------



## Calliope (2 July 2013)

Leigh Sales tonight tried to get under Joe Hockey's skin. She more that met her match. Joe can handle nasty interviewers much better than Abbott.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Leigh Sales tonight tried to get under Joe Hockey's skin.



Leigh's been backing off a bit in recent times.

I'll have to watch it.


----------



## Julia (2 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> Leigh's been backing off a bit in recent times.



That has been my observation also.  Starting with the very gentle chat with Anthony Albanese last night.

Re tonight, my sense at the end of the interview with Joe Hockey was that he really hadn't advanced the case for the Coalition much at all.
Perhaps my expectations are too high, but I couldn't help comparing his performance with the Peter Costello of yesteryear.


----------



## sptrawler (2 July 2013)

I was reading about the failed Aus aid reforestation of peat land in Indonesia today on the ABC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-...id-reforestation-program-in-indonesia/4794554

When reading it the only mention of any political party is the Libs in 2007, then the rest of the article talks about its demise.
It even says in the fourth last paragraph we were the second largest funder in 2008 - 2009.
Yet not once did they mention Labor implemented and controlled it for it from 2008 - 2013, funny that.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2013)

Julia said:


> Re tonight, my sense at the end of the interview with Joe Hockey was that he really hadn't advanced the case for the Coalition much at all.
> Perhaps my expectations are too high, but I couldn't help comparing his performance with the Peter Costello of yesteryear.



I didn't find it inspirational by any means, but I think the Coalition want to see the colour of Kevin Rudd's money before engaging in economic policy debate which in my view is the right choice.

Peter Costello can articulate a point far better than Joe Hockey. What's annoying about Pete is that he can be condescending about how he does it and in particular, that smirk.


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> I didn't find it inspirational by any means, but I think the Coalition want to see the colour of Kevin Rudd's money before engaging in economic policy debate which in my view is the right choice.
> 
> Peter Costello can articulate a point far better than Joe Hockey. What's annoying about Pete is that he can be condescending about how he does it and in particular, that smirk.




The difference is that Hockey has backbone. Costello was master of the smarta*se smirking reply, but lacked the guts to challenge Howard, thus ensuring six wasted years of Labor mismanagement.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> The difference is that Hockey has backbone. Costello was master of the smarta*se smirking reply, but lacked the guts to challenge Howard, thus ensuring six wasted years of Labor mismanagement.



I look at the leadership transition failure in the last term of the Howard government as one of failing to work out that transition amicably. This is a failure of both John Howard and Peter Costello.

Pete's problem was that he considered himself ordained for the role of PM. He clearly wasn't interested in the hard yards of Opposition Leader after the 2007 election. This is where he seriously let down the party.


----------



## Aussiejeff (3 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> I look at the leadership transition failure in the last term of the Howard government as one of failing to work out that transition amicably. This is a failure of both John Howard and Peter Costello.
> 
> Pete's problem was that he considered himself ordained for the role of PM. He clearly wasn't interested in the hard yards of Opposition Leader after the 2007 election. This is where he seriously let down the party.




He let down more than just the party, mate. How many voters did they lose over that fiasco? The memory of that weakness is likely still hurting the Coalition voter base.


----------



## noco (3 July 2013)

I think Andrew Bolt summed up Q&A very nicely on Monday night. He called it the pack attack on Sophie.





http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._has_any_abc_guest_been_interrupted_so_often/


----------



## sptrawler (3 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> I look at the leadership transition failure in the last term of the Howard government as one of failing to work out that transition amicably. This is a failure of both John Howard and Peter Costello.
> 
> Pete's problem was that he considered himself ordained for the role of PM. He clearly wasn't interested in the hard yards of Opposition Leader after the 2007 election. This is where he seriously let down the party.




+100
You hit the nail on the head there doc, perfect analysis.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> He let down more than just the party, mate. How many voters did they lose over that fiasco? The memory of that weakness is likely still hurting the Coalition voter base.



I don't disagree with that. 

Had they been fiscally responsible in their final term (thus limiting the need for the RBA to raise interest rates) and had an orderly leadership transition, they would still be in office today.


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2013)

At the present time, the boxer should ignore the taunts from the glasses-wearing kid in the library.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/rudd-calls-for-three-debates-before-election-campaign/4797840


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> At the present time, the boxer should ignore the taunts from the glasses-wearing kid in the library.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-03/rudd-calls-for-three-debates-before-election-campaign/4797840




Did you notice that in that interview Rudd made a reference to "the election towards the end of the year".


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Did you notice that in that interview Rudd made a reference to "the election towards the end of the year".



I haven't yet seen the actual interview.

I'll be particularly interested in how Leigh's style compares with Joe Hockey from last night.

EDIT:
Well, that's 13 and a half minutes of my life I won't get back and I do note the end-of-the-year comment in relation to the election.


----------



## Julia (3 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> I haven't yet seen the actual interview.
> 
> I'll be particularly interested in how Leigh's style compares with Joe Hockey from last night.



The tone of the Hockey and Rudd interviews was similar imo.  I felt Sales was off her game somehow, as though maybe she's not well.  
Tonight she let Rudd ramble on and her interjections of attempting to bring him back to her question seemed half hearted.

Seeing Rudd again in the position of PM, and hearing every day his patronising, supercilious, egocentric assurances is quite dreadful.  The idea that he is by god knows what means convincing the electorate that he's the saviour is much worse.


----------



## sptrawler (3 July 2013)

Julia said:


> The tone of the Hockey and Rudd interviews was similar imo.  I felt Sales was off her game somehow, as though maybe she's not well.
> Tonight she let Rudd ramble on and her interjections of attempting to bring him back to her question seemed half hearted.
> 
> Seeing Rudd again in the position of PM, and hearing every day his patronising, supercilious, egocentric assurances is quite dreadful.  The idea that he is by god knows what means convincing the electorate that he's the saviour is much worse.




The plebs they poll, don't watch ABC. 
They should give him a guest appearance on 'home and away' then you would see some poll action.lol
Also he couldn't pass up the opportunity, to be on 'home and away'. Jeez is there any wonder we have a border protection problem?
The rest of the world must be saying "go to Australia, it's run by idiots and if you get there, you qualify for welfare". 
Roll up Roll up, everyones a winner, except the locals, but who gives a $hit about them.


----------



## banco (3 July 2013)

The ABC never leaves anyone in any doubt on where they stand on the asylum seeker debate (exhibit A: Leigh Sales interview of Kevin Rudd).


----------



## MrBurns (3 July 2013)

Julia said:


> The tone of the Hockey and Rudd interviews was similar imo.  I felt Sales was off her game somehow, as though maybe she's not well.




Funny you should say that, I said that just a little while ago, I hope she's ok.


----------



## drsmith (4 July 2013)

In that interview last night, as hard as he tried, Kevin Rudd couldn't help himself from smirking just a little when asked about revenge.

I don't think it will take much to get under his skin, so it will be interesting to see what happens when the cracks start to appear. Leigh could have definitely pushed harder to some of his responses.

The Messiah of course is never wrong  with the classic case being the issue of border protection. He argues the present outcome is the electorate's fault because in 2007 he was given a mandate to unwind the Howard government's policies.

As noted yesterday, one thing he does set out clearly is the election timing. The end of the year in his view.



> KEVIN RUDD: Well the bottom line is, Leigh, when we got to the events of last week, I did not bring on this challenge; Julia Gillard decided to call a leadership ballot; and secondly, she then vacated the leadership. And it was invited for all to put their hand up and to nominate, and I did that. And the second is this - the second point's really important. *As we get close to the election at the end of the year*, the bottom line is pretty transparent to us all. The Australian Labor Party and the Government was on track towards a catastrophic defeat and I wasn't about to stand idly by and see everything we've worked for or the last five or six years go down the gurgle as Mr Abbott set about ripping it apart. They are the essential two reasons and I s'pose there's one other reason: I think at this stage we need to bring forth some new policies as well.




http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3795447.htm

My bolds.


----------



## Julia (4 July 2013)

Doesn't he risk further irritating the electorate if he pushes the election date out to the end of the year?
Perhaps I'm atypical, but the longer all this goes on, the more fed up with it all I become.


----------



## drsmith (4 July 2013)

Julia said:


> Doesn't he risk further irritating the electorate if he pushes the election date out to the end of the year?
> Perhaps I'm atypical, but the longer all this goes on, the more fed up with it all I become.



I suspect he's even more out-there than he was at the time he was first deposed as Labor leader. He is after all the messiah who, after 3-years of plotting has seen off the evil forces from within to rule the land again.  

On second thought, perhaps not all the evil forces. That will be interesting to see.

I also note the Tony Abbott is playing him with a very straight bat. This is a good move by the Opposition in my view. There's no need to engage in biff with the glasses wearing kid in the Library who's hurling taunts. Just wait for this attention seeker to see a decline in attention or a change in its nature and he'll throw a big tanty of his own accord.


----------



## Calliope (4 July 2013)

Leigh Sales tonight interviewed Kevin and Christine Fuller whose son was electrocuted while installing pink bats. It was an excellent interview and Mr Fuller was very articulate. He was satisfied with the coroner's report and how they pinpointed the culprits. The best line came near the end when Leigh Sales asked Christine what she wanted from Kevin Rudd.  She hesitated a moment and then said, from the heart of a bereaved mother;

"I would like him to disappear".

Amen to that, before he does more harm.


----------



## MrBurns (4 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Leigh Sales tonight interviewed Kevin and Christine Fuller whose son was electrocuted while installing pink bats. It was an excellent interview and Mr Fuller was very articulate. He was satisfied with the coroner's report and how they pinpointed the culprits. The best line came near the end when Leigh Sales asked Christine what she wanted from Kevin Rudd.  She hesitated a moment and then said;
> 
> "I would like him to disappear".
> 
> Amen to that, before he does more harm.




I agree, I think it's time to lift the bar on the quality of our leaders, what we've had lately is pathetic, I hope Abbott shows the way.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2013)

Mrs Fuller's remark has certainly put this clown under the spotlight. Hopefully she has opened people's eyes as to what a  hollow-man Rudd is, and it will the beginning of his fall from grace.



> Mr Rudd overnight offered an "unreserved apology" to the victims of the scheme, that was rolled out as a key stimulus measure under his first term as Prime Minister, following the release yesterday of the Queensland Coroner’s report



.

Trust Rudd to always be able to trot out an apology on any issue and the then carry on doing the same nasty things.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> near the end when Leigh Sales asked Christine what she wanted from Kevin Rudd.  She hesitated a moment and then said, from the heart of a bereaved mother;
> 
> "I would like him to disappear".
> 
> .




Running 24/7 on the ABC. This will deeply hurt Rudds standing.


----------



## Logique (5 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Mrs Fuller's remark has certainly put this clown under the spotlight. Hopefully she has opened people's eyes as to what a  hollow-man Rudd is, and it will the beginning of his fall from grace.
> 
> Trust Rudd to always be able to trot out an apology on any issue and the then carry on doing the same nasty things.



Peter Beattie used the mea culpa tactic to perfection.

With Rudd, he deigned to challenge the last time around, and wore a lot of flak for that, but he has been proved right. Although not on much else.

I don't see why he couldn't honour 14 Sept election date, it's long established.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2013)

Anyone who watched the Indonesian Q&A last night could not have failed to be impressed by the intelligence, wit and charm of the Indonesian panelists. The were certainly a cut above the panelists that are inflicted on us at home.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3788237.htm

Off Topic, but this illustrates Indonesian disquiet about our attitude to them. 



> *Patronising approach won't impress Indonesia*
> BY:KORNELIUS PURBA From: The Australian July 05, 2013 12:00AM
> 
> MANY Indonesians find it hard to control their temper each time they read or hear any kind of provocative remark from the Australian media, military, politicians or celebrities. The country is perceived as an arrogant neighbour with a strong sense of superiority towards Indonesia and no more important agenda than to destroy its territorial integrity.
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...mpress-indonesia/story-e6frg6zo-1226674520315


----------



## Calliope (7 July 2013)

My highlight on The Insiders this morning came after the cartoon segment, when guest cartoonist John Kudelka said "Back to you Kevin...I mean, Barry".

He won't be invited back again.


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2013)

The contrast in views on Labor by Chris Uhlmann and Barrie Cassidy, 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-05/uhlmann-labor-is-sinking-and-the-captains-are-to-blame/4802032
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-05/cassidy-how-close-will-the-election-be/4799892

Barrie's tip for an election is October.


----------



## IFocus (7 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> The contrast in views on Labor by Chris Uhlmann and Barrie Cassidy,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-05/uhlmann-labor-is-sinking-and-the-captains-are-to-blame/4802032
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-05/cassidy-how-close-will-the-election-be/4799892
> ...





Wrong thread that would make the ABC apolitical-ish


----------



## noco (7 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Mrs Fuller's remark has certainly put this clown under the spotlight. Hopefully she has opened people's eyes as to what a  hollow-man Rudd is, and it will the beginning of his fall from grace.
> 
> .
> 
> Trust Rudd to always be able to trot out an apology on any issue and the then carry on doing the same nasty things.




As Christopher Pyne stated, "YOU CAN PUT A NEW LID ON A GARBABE BIN BUT THE PLAIN  FACT IS, IT IS THE SAME OLD BIN WITH THE SAME OLD RUBBISH INSIDE.


----------



## Calliope (7 July 2013)

IFocus said:


> Wrong thread that would make the ABC apolitical-ish




It's just a momentary aberration. The tipping point for Rudd's chances came when Christine Fuller said; "I'd like for him to disappear".  The monster has crawled out of the slime but he will be sucked back in.


----------



## Knobby22 (8 July 2013)

noco said:


> As Christopher Pyne stated, "YOU CAN PUT A NEW LID ON A GARBABE BIN BUT THE PLAIN  FACT IS, IT IS THE SAME OLD BIN WITH THE SAME OLD RUBBISH INSIDE.




Christopher Pyne is sounding shrill. maybe they should get someone else to make the comments.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Christopher Pyne is sounding shrill. maybe they should get someone else to make the comments.




Well Gillard did say he was a "mincing poodle". 



> Mincing
> 
> To walk or sashe/shante in a very effeminate and/or swishy way. To walk as if wearing a pair of invisible high heels.




Poodles do tend to be shrill when provoked.


----------



## Knobby22 (8 July 2013)

Poodles get all the bad press. I had one growing up. It was actually a smart dog. 
They can walk on their hind legs though hence the mincing. 

I can't put my finger on it but Chris Pyne does remind me of Alexander Downer in some way.


----------



## Julia (8 July 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Poodles get all the bad press. I had one growing up. It was actually a smart dog.



They are usually considered the most intelligent dog of all.
(Of course, being a German Shepherd owner, I absolutely cannot accept that.)



> I can't put my finger on it but Chris Pyne does remind me of Alexander Downer in some way.



I know what you mean.  Maybe the clear enunciation of the South Australian accent/the 'private school' type aura of privilege?

- - - Updated - - -

Four Corners this evening should be worth a look.  The lead up to the final ballot.


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Poodles get all the bad press. I had one growing up. It was actually a smart dog.
> They can walk on their hind legs though hence the mincing.
> 
> I can't put my finger on it but Chris Pyne does remind me of Alexander Downer in some way.



He comes across with the impression he thinks he's a cut above everybody else.


----------



## Knobby22 (8 July 2013)

Yes, that's it. It's an aura.


----------



## MrBurns (8 July 2013)

drsmith said:


> He comes across with the impression he thinks he's a cut above everybody else.




Comes across as a "Ritchie Rich" type but I think he's smart and worth listening to.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Poodles get all the bad press. I had one growing up. It was actually a smart dog.
> They can walk on their hind legs though hence the mincing.
> 
> I can't put my finger on it but Chris Pyne does remind me of Alexander Downer in some way.




I guess it's OK to label some men as effeminate (Downer's net stockings cartoons won't go away) but if any Liberal labelled Penny Wong as a "strutting ****" there would be hell to pay.


----------



## dutchie (31 July 2013)

ABC morning news is truthful!

The ABC morning news this morning admitted that Asylum Seekers, under Labor, was a "*growth industry*" !!!


Michael Rowland expected to lose his job.


----------



## noco (31 July 2013)

dutchie said:


> ABC morning news is truthful!
> 
> The ABC morning news this morning admitted that Asylum Seekers, under Labor, was a "*growth industry*" !!!
> 
> ...




It is a wonder the ABC did not blame Abbott. 

I noted this morning Viginia Tripoli is trying hard to make soimething out of a connection with Scott Morrison and Toll Holdings over some deal on Manus or Nauru.


----------



## Miss Hale (6 August 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> Poodles get all the bad press. I had one growing up. It was actually a smart dog.
> They can walk on their hind legs though hence the mincing.
> 
> I can't put my finger on it but Chris Pyne does remind me of Alexander Downer in some way.




It's the accent I tell ya!  Both Downer and Pyne have that classic South Australian accent.  They say 'are' when they mean 'our'.  For example, 'our policies' comes out as 'are policies'.  Penny Wong does it too but because she is a woman and a Labor party member you don't automatically make the connection. 


I agree about poodles, not my favourite pooch, but much maligned and very smart.


----------



## Ijustnewit (11 August 2013)

"Abbott to run City2Surf"

The story below from bigpond News mentions Abbott is running alongside vision impaired athlete Nathan Johnstone.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Top...P_NEWS_L_L1-2_AbbotttorunCity2Surf_RSS_100813

The story from ABC below says Abbott is going for a jog through Sydney , no mention of why he is doing it and whom he has given up his time to help.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-...repare-for-first-debate-as-day-7-of-c/4878642

Yes more very poor form from the ABC


----------



## sails (11 August 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> "Abbott to run City2Surf"
> 
> The story below from bigpond News mentions Abbott is running alongside vision impaired athlete Nathan Johnstone.
> 
> ...




Anyone with facebook could spread the word as that seems to be the medium labor are using.  Abbott has a facebook page and the story is on there with photos.


----------



## dutchie (15 August 2013)

ABC continues to be so blatantly pro Labor and anti Coalition.

They have plugged the "sex appeal" comment to death.

Next Coalition Government will really need to consider the funding of this arm of the Labor party.

I certainly don't want to fund it with my taxes.


----------



## MrBurns (15 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> ABC continues to be so blatantly pro Labor and anti Coalition.
> 
> They have plugged the "sex appeal" comment to death.
> 
> ...




Yes I agree, the ABC are a disgrace.


----------



## Tink (15 August 2013)

Hear hear dutchie, I was disgusted listening to one of the radio shows one day, I had to turn the station. 
I just couldnt believe how biased they were.

How can we be funding this station?


----------



## noco (15 August 2013)

dutchie said:


> ABC continues to be so blatantly pro Labor and anti Coalition.
> 
> They have plugged the "sex appeal" comment to death.
> 
> ...




No worries dutchie, I believe Abbot will do some ethnic cleansing when he takes over on the 7th September.

I would say some of the ABC people are already looking for alternative jobs.


----------



## Calliope (15 August 2013)

noco said:


> I would say some of the ABC people are already looking for alternative jobs.




What could they do?:dunno:


----------



## noco (15 August 2013)

Calliope said:


> What could they do?:dunno:




Labor will look after them somewhere around the country, if not in the Federal sphere maybe in one of the Labor states.

Come what may, Abbott has to strike a balance in the ABC by eliminating the pro leftie Laborites.


----------



## MrBurns (20 August 2013)

Rudd has the run of News 24 streamed to the ABC web site again for a lengthy session of his usual bull dust but it just goes on and on, Rudd has had an enormous chunk of ABC airtime this morning............ it's like as if the ABC are biased


----------



## Logique (22 August 2013)

Not political, but I can't find an appropriate ABC related thread. 

Go back to TripleJ Robbie Buck, and take your disposable music with you.

A saving grace of ABC Radio National has been that it had two one-hour shows of good music, afternoon and evening, thanks to Lucky Oceans and Doug Spencer.

But Lucky and Doug have been booted from the afternoon slot. Instead we have the execrable music choices of Robbie Buck. If music was cheese, Robbie's would come in plastic wrapped slices.

This kind of audio cruelty should not be inflicted upon taxpaying Australians. Go back to TripleJ Robbie Buck...please! I am holding this against the Radio National management.


----------



## Julia (22 August 2013)

Logique said:


> This kind of audio cruelty should not be inflicted upon taxpaying Australians. Go back to TripleJ Robbie Buck...please! I am holding this against the Radio National management.



Have you told them this?


----------



## Calliope (3 September 2013)

How could anyone not like the ABC's Annabel Crabb?

Annabel Crabb, ABC online's The Drum, yesterday:



> THERE was also no mistaking the pattern of behaviour. Six years ago, we sent her husband to the shops for an education revolution, an emissions trading scheme, a bunch of new childcare centres, a broadband network and some help with the cost of living. And he came home with 10,000 school halls, a mining tax, 50,000 boatpeople, net debt at more than 10 per cent of GDP, a broadband system much bigger than the one we ordered and the resignations of half the cabinet.


----------



## Julia (3 September 2013)

She's smart, astute and funny.  Her "Kitchen Cabinet" featuring Rudd and Abbott on Wednesday and Thursday nights on ABC1 should be worth watching.
(not sure which bloke on which night)


----------



## sails (3 September 2013)

Julia said:


> She's smart, astute and funny.  Her "Kitchen Cabinet" featuring Rudd and Abbott on Wednesday and Thursday nights on ABC1 should be worth watching.
> (not sure which bloke on which night)




That's right - this is the cooking show where Rudd apparently sneaked while having us all under the impression he was flying to Canberra for urgent talks over Syria.


----------



## Aussiejeff (4 September 2013)

The level of panic seems to be rising at the ABC in the last few days.. seems like about 85% of content is Labor Party related? I wonder why?


----------



## Uncle Festivus (4 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I was stopped at a State/Federal Roadblock today with about 10 workers on a major highway, and was forced to listen to ABC Radio National Rural Report.
> 
> I expected to be regaled with low prices, lack of rain, etc. etc. but instead suffered 18 minutes of bloody global warming claptrap.
> 
> ...




Perhaps they just report the facts after all? Tony (a global warming denier??) is so close now - can he keep his mouth shut for 2 more days 



> Australia has just experienced its warmest 12 months *since climate records began*.
> 
> Data monitoring by the Bureau of Meteorology shows the average temperature throughout Australia in the year to August 31 was 1.11 degrees above the long-term average.
> 
> ...




I'm not a disciple of any of the nitwits so my view of the ABC is that they are not biased in factual presentation. The staff may exhibit a left 'ambience' but rarely do I see it translate into bias when interviewing pollies ect or presenting news. They are not overtly conservative so the conservatives automatically label them 'left'? It a bit like 'if you aren't with us then you are against us' for the shrill conservative junta like Hadley & Jones. If you want to see the definition of biased just buy a Murdock paper......


----------



## chiff (4 September 2013)

One should complain about bias..Roger Corbett, a paid up member of the Liberal Party,was allowed to give commentary denigrating Ruddwithout it being credited as Liberal Party advertisement.
What is the ABC coming to with their political bias..


----------



## sails (4 September 2013)

chiff said:


> One should complain about bias..Roger Corbett, a paid up member of the Liberal Party,was allowed to give commentary denigrating Ruddwithout it being credited as Liberal Party advertisement.
> What is the ABC coming to with their political bias..




I would think there have been many paid up labor members commenting on the ABC offering their own opinions - do you complain about as well?

Whether or not Corbett is a paid up liberal member, I don't know, and you have provided no substantiation to your claims.  But even if he is, it's not a crime to talk about your own opinions. 

This sounds more like you are grasping at straws!


----------



## IFocus (4 September 2013)

sails said:


> I would think there have been many paid up labor members commenting on the ABC offering their own opinions - do you complain about as well?
> 
> Whether or not Corbett is a paid up liberal member, I don't know, and you have provided no substantiation to your claims.  But even if he is, it's not a crime to talk about your own opinions.
> 
> This sounds more like you are grasping at straws!





Corbett is a Liberal Member just commented on the election thread.


----------



## MrBurns (4 September 2013)

> Rudd seizes on GDP figures, warns of recession under Abbott




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

This has been front and centre on the ABC web site all day, reporting Rudd's statement about a recession as fact, they've crossed the line now, must be desperate.


----------



## drsmith (4 September 2013)

The ABC broadcast this yesterday.


----------



## sails (4 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/
> 
> This has been front and centre on the ABC web site all day, reporting Rudd's statement about a recession as fact, they've crossed the line now, must be desperate.





After all their critisism of Abbott supposedly talking down the economy, now Rudd tries to scare people into a recession.  More likely we would end up with a recession if labor get back in for another three years, imo.  Can only imagine what the debt level would be like...


----------



## noco (4 September 2013)

​


sails said:


> After all their critisism of Abbott supposedly talking down the economy, now Rudd tries to scare people into a recession.  More likely we would end up with a recession if labor get back in for another three years, imo.  Can only imagine what the debt level would be like...




Sails, I woundn't worry about what Rudd says. Level headed people have stopped listening to this rat bag


----------



## Aussiejeff (5 September 2013)

noco said:


> ​
> Sails, I woundn't worry about what* Rudd* says. Level headed people have stopped listening to this rat bag




Who?


----------



## chiff (5 September 2013)

With regards Roger Corbett...what do you think would happen if a clandestine Labor member gave an interview like that.I am positive that the many conservative members on this forum would be screaming blue murder.It would be proof positive that the ABC was politically biased.
One of my little annoyances is Q and A  on the ABC.I wish that they would ban politicians from the panels.I do not want politicians of any persuasion to air their partisan views.And then we have applause from the audience when any view coincides with theirs,that is,pierces their bias grid.As soon as the applause starts I turn off the TV.
What we should have is people with different views that stimulate our thought processes.I am a sucker for an articulate intellectual-someone that I recognise has superior and different thought processes than my own.
However,perhaps most people need their personal views validated?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 September 2013)

chiff said:


> With regards Roger Corbett...what do you think would happen if a clandestine Labor member gave an interview like that.I am positive that the many conservative members on this forum would be screaming blue murder.It would be proof positive that the ABC was politically biased.
> One of my little annoyances is Q and A  on the ABC.I wish that they would ban politicians from the panels.I do not want politicians of any persuasion to air their partisan views.And then we have applause from the audience when any view coincides with theirs,that is,pierces their bias grid.As soon as the applause starts I turn off the TV.
> What we should have is people with different views that stimulate our thought processes.I am a sucker for an articulate intellectual-someone that I recognise has superior and different thought processes than my own.
> However,perhaps most people need their personal views validated?




Reasoned debate with full disclosure of interests is reasonable.

It should be de rigeur that ABC political analysts and interviewers state their political leanings.

Corbett has as much right as anyone else to slag off Rudd. He would be the only one in the country, ALP or Coalition, not to have done so.

As for QandA and Insiders they are stacked with lefties.

gg


----------



## Calliope (5 September 2013)

sails said:


> After all their critisism of Abbott supposedly talking down the economy, now Rudd tries to scare people into a recession.  More likely we would end up with a recession if labor get back in for another three years, imo.  Can only imagine what the debt level would be like...




Sails, they do sometimes mix in a touch of comedy with their propaganda. On local ABC radio this morning they had on a top union official who said that Abbott was going to cut health and education services to "smithereens".


----------



## IFocus (5 September 2013)

chiff said:


> With regards Roger Corbett...what do you think would happen if a clandestine Labor member gave an interview like that.I am positive that the many conservative members on this forum would be screaming blue murder.It would be proof positive that the ABC was politically biased.




I think there is plenty of evidence in these threads to show that the posters here have an open and fair mined view of all things *extreme right wing* LOL  

The dark side will always make the loudest noise the side where there is light can only try to show them enlightenment.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

Former union heavyweight Bill Kelty was an RBA board member.

http://www.rba.gov.au/about-rba/history/rba-board-members.html


----------



## chiff (5 September 2013)

Any one want to comment positively about Tony Abbott's performance last night with Annabel Crabb?
It is hard not to be impressed with Annabel,and I do like the fifties? outfits.Dare to be different!
My guess is that everyone is saving up the plaudits for Kevin Rudd tonight.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

chiff said:


> Any one want to comment positively about Tony Abbott's performance last night with Annabel Crabb?



In the one on one chat they had while they dined, I was impressed by how he reflected upon himself.

It will be interesting to see what Kevin has to say in comparison.


----------



## basilio (5 September 2013)

I thought it was interesting how all the commercial TV stations refused to show a Get Up ad.

The ad  was pointing out that the Murdoch Press were clearly determined to  get rid of the Rudd Labour Government  clearly demonstrated by the front page articles they ran attacking the government. Get Up thought the public might like to make their own minds up on the issue of who to vote for.

Now what a surprise that the entire commercial media decided not to allow such an ad.

The full story is (naturally) on the ABC. (_You don't seriously expect the commercial media to make a story on their desire to kill an ad that challenges one of their biggest, meanest mates ?_

And the ad is certainly worth a look - if only to remind us we are supposed to have free speech and an informed democracy.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2013/s3839757.htm
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/09/banned-anti-murdoch-ad-finds-new-voice-on-web/


----------



## dutchie (5 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> The dark side will always make the loudest noise the side where there is light can only try to show them enlightenment.




$300 Billion in debt is certainly enlightening.


----------



## noco (5 September 2013)

```

```



chiff said:


> Any one want to comment positively about Tony Abbott's performance last night with Annabel Crabb?
> It is hard not to be impressed with Annabel,and I do like the fifties? outfits.Dare to be different!
> My guess is that everyone is saving up the plaudits for Kevin Rudd tonight.




I think Annabel has keep the left overs from last night to dish up to Rudd tonight. 

I hope she forgets to put them in the micro oven.

Maybe she will give Rudd some hot tongue and cold shoulder.


----------



## MrBurns (5 September 2013)

I think Rudd's conversation will make it hard for Annabel to eat anything.


----------



## Julia (5 September 2013)

I enjoyed Annabel's chat with Tony Abbott.  It seemed for the most part to be quite thoughtful and interested on both of their parts.  I liked that Tony Abbott was as self-disclosing about quite personal stuff and all up, felt reassured about Mr Abbott as PM.


----------



## noco (5 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I think Rudd's conversation will make it hard for Annabel to eat anything.




She might even ask him the question, "DO YOU EVER SHUT UP", because she most likely won't be able to get a wrod in. 

It will be Abbott, Abbott, Abbott, cut,cut,cut,cut, nega,nega negativity.


----------



## DocK (5 September 2013)

Julia said:


> I enjoyed Annabel's chat with Tony Abbott.  It seemed for the most part to be quite thoughtful and interested on both of their parts.  I liked that Tony Abbott was as self-disclosing about quite personal stuff and all up, felt reassured about Mr Abbott as PM.




+1, although I'm getting a little tired of the constant presence of his daughters.  I was relieved they weren't present for the entire show.  I was also somewhat relieved to hear him acknowledge that a politician in his position must leave his faith-based decisions to his personal life - or words to that effect.  Although he lacks the easy conversational style of Rudd, I find him more believable on the whole.  Rudd is certainly more entertaining, but my perception is that at least half of what he says is insincere.  Looking forward to tonight's episode.

I've also enjoyed Annabel on the Gruen Nation show - she appears to have less personal bias than most of the other panellists.


----------



## MrBurns (5 September 2013)

Julia said:


> I enjoyed Annabel's chat with Tony Abbott.  It seemed for the most part to be quite thoughtful and interested on both of their parts.  I liked that Tony Abbott was as self-disclosing about quite personal stuff and all up, felt reassured about Mr Abbott as PM.




+1 

I noticed at one point one of his daughters laughed and she sounded a bit like her dad.


----------



## Macquack (5 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> *Former union heavyweight Bill Kelty *was an RBA board member.
> 
> http://www.rba.gov.au/about-rba/history/rba-board-members.html




What's your point, Smith???

*Frank Lowy, shopping centre heavyweight* and richest man in Australia was also gifted the honour of being in charge of the BIGGEST cookie jar of them all.


----------



## drsmith (5 September 2013)

Macquack said:


> What's your point ?



Read more than one post and you will see.


----------



## Julia (5 September 2013)

DocK said:


> although I'm getting a little tired of the constant presence of his daughters.



It has been noticeable that daughters have been featured on both sides.  Presumably to reassure us that both Abbott and Rudd are loving family men, wholly supported by their photogenic daughters.

Jessica Rudd was featured heavily in Annabel's  afternoon tea with Kevin shown this evening.
I much preferred the format of her previous series where there was just Annabel and the politician.

I expect I can't entirely remove my bias of detesting Kevin Rudd, but I found him in this evening's Kitchen Cabinet to be only marginally less pompous than he was in the woefully evasive interview on "7.30" which preceded it.  Leigh Sales did her best to get to him to give some real answers, but she was not a match for Mr Rudd's astonishing capacity to sound plausible while entirely avoiding the question.

He has for ever put me off the expression "And furthermore....".


----------



## chiff (6 September 2013)

I think that they both used their daughters to take the pressure of themselves at the start-as a diversion.Maybe they were both worried about some forensic questioning from Annabel and hence the shields.
And a loving dog is always a good human touch.


----------



## DocK (6 September 2013)

Julia said:


> It has been noticeable that daughters have been featured on both sides.  Presumably to reassure us that both Abbott and Rudd are loving family men, wholly supported by their photogenic daughters.
> 
> Jessica Rudd was featured heavily in Annabel's  afternoon tea with Kevin shown this evening.
> I much preferred the format of her previous series where there was just Annabel and the politician.
> ...




I was hoping to see a glimmer of "the Real Kevin", but stopped watching before the end - I've reached the point where I just can't take any more of his voice going on, and on, and on....., but not really saying anything that seemed completely sincere.

As to the daughters - I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Jessica Rudd enter the political stage at some point in the future.


----------



## Ijustnewit (10 September 2013)

The ABC still have not learnt their lesson to stay neutral. Today on ABC News 24 they are hammering the following.
Peta Credlins drink driving charge , updating the story and replaying it every ten minutes. Making sure they mention Tony Abbott in every sentence.
Steve Bracks stripping of the consul-general role in New York , making sure they make the Coalition look as bad as they can.
Alison Anderson's dumping in NT , boy the ABC conspiracy theorist are out today.
www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-09/alis...ritory-government-ministry/4946594?section=nt
They really took the cake this morning when they crossed to an_ Indonesian reporter_ for his opinion on the turning back the boats policy , the reporter said " It is physically impossible for it to be done". Who cares what the Indonesian Media think , they are our borders.

Lets hope Abbott runs a big broom through this lot ASAP.


----------



## dutchie (15 September 2013)

Not political, but interesting.

Watched Offsiders this morning. At the end of the discussion about the 2022 World Cup going to Qatar in controversial circumstances, Gerard Whateley rubbed his fingers together (indicating money), which was quickly cut off the screen.

Bribes????


http://www.foxsports.com.au/footbal...cup/story-e6frf423-1226717830805#.UjUhlX9qPGA


----------



## noco (15 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> The ABC still have not learnt their lesson to stay neutral. Today on ABC News 24 they are hammering the following.
> Peta Credlins drink driving charge , updating the story and replaying it every ten minutes. Making sure they mention Tony Abbott in every sentence.
> Steve Bracks stripping of the consul-general role in New York , making sure they make the Coalition look as bad as they can.
> Alison Anderson's dumping in NT , boy the ABC conspiracy theorist are out today.
> ...




I am sure there will be some ethnic cleansing very soon, either that or some will change the spots on their coats to suit the climate of the time.


----------



## MrBurns (16 September 2013)

Now these bludgers are complaining because there aren't enough women in the Abbott line up

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-16/abbott-unveils-new-ministry/4960186


----------



## Ijustnewit (16 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Now these bludgers are complaining because there aren't enough women in the Abbott line up
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-16/abbott-unveils-new-ministry/4960186




Yes I saw a segment on ABC 24 this morning. They had Latika Bourke on saying that Gillard was right , that "cabinet would be dominated by men in blue ties". They let her go on for 10 minutes with her rant about a womanless Abbott Government. Bourke is a serial Left wing pest and should not have a job paid for by the taxpayers of Australia if she can't remain neutral ,and keep her extreme views out of the story.


----------



## MrBurns (16 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Yes I saw a segment on ABC 24 this morning. They had Latika Bourke on saying that Gillard was right , that "cabinet would be dominated by men in blue ties". They let her go on for 10 minutes with her rant about a womanless Abbott Government. Bourke is a serial Left wing pest and should not have a job paid for by the taxpayers of Australia if she can't remain neutral ,and keep her extreme views out of the story.




I put a comment on their web site expressing my views, it was published then disappeared........:bad:


----------



## banco (16 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Now these bludgers are complaining because there aren't enough women in the Abbott line up
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-16/abbott-unveils-new-ministry/4960186




Those bloody hippies.  Don't they know that women make up almost 10% of Abbott's cabinet?


----------



## Julia (16 September 2013)

Give me genuine quality and experience over gender equality every time.  If the best qualified people happen to be male, then imo Tony Abbott is doing the right thing in promoting them first.

The feminazi will settle down in a day or two.

Mr Abbott is showing every sign of making his own decisions and holding fast to them.  Bravo!


----------



## Miss Hale (16 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Give me genuine quality and experience over gender equality every time.  If the best qualified people happen to be male, then imo Tony Abbott is doing the right thing in promoting them first.
> 
> The feminazi will settle down in a day or two.
> 
> Mr Abbott is showing every sign of making his own decisions and holding fast to them.  Bravo!




Precisely. 

ABC are really clutching at straws if they think this is a story.  The fact that Abbott was voted in surely shows that the electorate DON'T think he's a misogynist so running with this line is just plain dopey


----------



## Tink (17 September 2013)

Agree, Julia and Miss Hale


----------



## Calliope (19 September 2013)

The ABC loves Clive!


----------



## MrBurns (19 September 2013)

Tony Jones on Lateline last night was obviously gleeful interviewing an Indonesian MP and leading him in a direction that suited the ABC agenda.
It was almost like they had agreed beforehand that that Abbots policy regarding the boats was to be attacked.



> Asylum policy offensive and illegal: Indonesian MP




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-...ck-the-boats-policy-is-offensive-and-/4966934

Yes he was led along nicely by the accommodating Mr Jones.


----------



## sails (19 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Tony Jones on Lateline last night was obviously gleeful interviewing an Indonesian MP and leading him in a direction that suited the ABC agenda.
> It was almost like they had agreed beforehand that that Abbots policy regarding the boats was to be attacked.
> 
> 
> ...




Clearly the new Aussie government has not had time yet to talk to Indonesia, but the statements below seem to confirm Julie Bishop's comments on Meet the Press on Sunday that Indonesia do want to find a solution to the problem.  It seems Indonesia has only read what's written in the papers and if they only read the ABC there's a good chance they may have a distorted perception, imo.

From the article you posted, MrBurns:



> "Indonesia accepts all possible solutions, all possible proposals from Australia. We are also concerned about it. We don't want it to happen in the future. This case should be settled in a very modest and a very peaceful way."
> 
> Mr Yahya says the plan to pay for information about people smugglers and to buy back boats had not been discussed with Indonesian officials as far as he was aware.
> 
> "It's very offensive," he said. "We just know everything from the newspaper."


----------



## chiff (19 September 2013)

sails said:


> Clearly the new Aussie government has not had time yet to talk to Indonesia, but the statements below seem to confirm Julie Bishop's comments on Meet the Press on Sunday that Indonesia do want to find a solution to the problem.  It seems Indonesia has only read what's written in the papers and if they only read the ABC there's a good chance they may have a distorted perception, imo.
> 
> From the article you posted, MrBurns:[/Q
> 
> ...


----------



## boofhead (19 September 2013)

Both parties had various discussions with Indonesia in the last few months although the current government was no in power. I expect the Indonesians had a feeling that Abbott would be the next PM.


----------



## bellenuit (19 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Tony Jones on Lateline last night was obviously gleeful interviewing an Indonesian MP and leading him in a direction that suited the ABC agenda.
> It was almost like they had agreed beforehand that that Abbots policy regarding the boats was to be attacked.
> 
> 
> ...




I thought the  interview was appalling. It was almost as if Tony Jones wanted Indonesia to declare war on the program. They are trying to create news, not report it. I was anticipating that the outcome of that interview would be the lead story on their NewsRadio channel this morning and I was not disappointed.


----------



## boofis (19 September 2013)

Glad to see others are switched on to ABC. Have been Tweeting as fast as my fingers allow to try and get an explanation on the interview on lateline. 
Also trying to get Media Watch to give an objective rundown on the ABCs election campaign coverage.


----------



## craft (19 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Give me genuine quality and experience over gender equality every time.  If the best qualified people happen to be male, then imo Tony Abbott is doing the right thing in promoting them first.
> 
> The feminazi will settle down in a day or two.
> 
> Mr Abbott is showing every sign of making his own decisions and holding fast to them.  Bravo!




Crikey I’m a feminazi and didn’t even know it (didn't even realise I could be one being a bloke and all). Must come from watching too much ABC.

If quality and experience doesn’t end up being broadly similar in the Liberal party to the wider demographics ie 50/50 ish then there is something systemically wrong in how opportunities to gain experience arise or how quality is judged.

Probably not Abbotts fault as he inherited an organisational culture. A reasonable question of him though, is in his nearly  four years at the top of the liberal party what’s happened to improve the situation so far?

I'm happy to give him a go and don’t buy the misogyny line but I would be disappointed if in his time some real progress is not made in evening up the ledger at the top.


----------



## sails (19 September 2013)

chiff said:


> I think that you will find that the Indonesians are more well informed than you think.
> Is Australia indulging in megaphone diplomacy without talking to the Indonesians first?
> If the opposition had done that whilst  in government the conservatives on this forum would be deriding them.
> Do you think that Indonesians see Australia as hypocrites regarding refugees?




Chiff, it's NOT what I think.  I posted what the Indonesian MP said.  He said they only knew what was in the papers.

Surely it doesn't have to be spelled out that coalition would have been out of line to start negotiations with Indonesia before they were sworn in let alone before the election.  So there is no way an Indonesian MP would be able to predict how future discussions with Indonesia will go and so it looks like he based his comments on what was in the media to date. I understand Abbott is flying to Indonesia next week.

Let's see how things go AFTER the two governments have had meetings.  In any case, that article makes it pretty clear that Indonesia wants to address the problem.


----------



## sails (19 September 2013)

craft said:


> ...I'm happy to give him a go and don’t buy the misogyny line but I would be disappointed if in his time some real progress is not made in evening up the ledger at the top.




Surely there are more important problems for the coalition to fix than trying to treat women like second class citizens by promoting them simply because of their gender?

Abbott has two women in high powered positions - one is to be speaker and the other is foreign minister.  Both women want to be judged on merit and competence and NOT gender.

I am female and I think it is an insult to place women in positions of power simply because of their gender.  I think promotion should be earned.

Abbott is putting up and coming women into positions where they will gain in experience.  It seems that is being overlooked by the pathetic left.


----------



## McLovin (19 September 2013)

sails said:


> Chiff, it's NOT what I think.  I posted what the Indonesian MP said.  He said they only knew what was in the papers.
> 
> Surely it doesn't have to be spelled out that coalition would have been out of line to start negotiations with Indonesia before they were sworn in let alone before the election.  So there is no way an Indonesian MP would be able to predict how future discussions with Indonesia will go and so it looks like he based his comments on what was in the media to date. I understand Abbott is flying to Indonesia next week.
> 
> Let's see how things go AFTER the two governments have had meetings.  In any case, that article makes it pretty clear that Indonesia wants to address the problem.




Diplomacy 101 says that you don't announce foreign policy through the media. It's fine to make general motherhood statement like "stop the boats" but saying things like Australia will use its Navy to tow boats back into Indonesian waters is just stupidity. Imagine if the Indonesian navy said they would be towing boats into Australian waters?


----------



## craft (19 September 2013)

sails said:


> Surely there are more important problems for the coalition to fix than trying to treat women like second class citizens by promoting them simply because of their gender?
> 
> Abbott has two women in high powered positions - one is to be speaker and the other is foreign minister.  Both women want to be judged on merit and competence and NOT gender.
> 
> ...




I’m pretty sure I didn’t advocate positive discrimination.  Just remove the systemic and pervasive negative discrimination and the ledger will balance itself out naturally over time– unless of course women are inferior – not a proposition I accept.  I also don’t think everybody who cares about a more balanced female representation in positions of power is a left wing nutter.

Anyrate happy to watch and see but 6 of 42 doesn’t inspire me initially – don’t know enough about what he’s facilitating lower down the organisation to have an objective opinion yet. 

Exit stage LEFT.


----------



## Ijustnewit (19 September 2013)

boofis said:


> Glad to see others are switched on to ABC. Have been Tweeting as fast as my fingers allow to try and get an explanation on the interview on lateline.
> Also trying to get Media Watch to give an objective rundown on the ABCs election campaign coverage.




It's interesting that ABC is not part of the Free TV network. And therefore not subject to the code of practice of Free TV , relating to fairness and accuracy in news and current affairs.
It states on the Free TV network site that the ABC and SBS are covered and subject to their own " Code of Practice". It goes on to say that if the viewer has any concerns about the ABC or SBS that the viewer must contact those stations and raise the issue with them. Yeah good luck with that :1zhelp:

www.freetv.com.au/content_common/pg-viewer-feedback.seo

Perhaps we should all submit complaints to the ABC or gather a petition ? I wonder what the outcome would be ?
BTW as I  type ABC news 24 has Lyndal Curtis one of the ABC's worst offenders giving Abbott another blast about Indonesia.


----------



## MrBurns (19 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> BTW as I  type ABC news 24 has Lyndal Curtis one of the ABC's worst offenders giving Abbott another blast about Indonesia.




I love the ABC but I think they're getting out of hand, Jones looked the happiest I've seen him as he gave leading questions to the Indonesian MP.

It's becoming obvious now that the ABC is going to give this Govt a hard time no matter what they do.


----------



## Julia (19 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> It's interesting that ABC is not part of the Free TV network. And therefore not subject to the code of practice of Free TV , relating to fairness and accuracy in news and current affairs.
> It states on the Free TV network site that the ABC and SBS are covered and subject to their own " Code of Practice". It goes on to say that if the viewer has any concerns about the ABC or SBS that the viewer must contact those stations and raise the issue with them. Yeah good luck with that :1zhelp:
> 
> www.freetv.com.au/content_common/pg-viewer-feedback.seo
> ...



Interesting that you should raise this.  I've just been looking into how one goes about making a complaint to ACMA.  This was sparked by purposely avoiding the Tony Jones interview last night in anticipation of its tone, only to later have Tony Delroy, host on ABC Local Radio network, encouraging Anti Abbott sentiment on his talkback program.  The same callers are again and again put to air with their pro Labor/anti government sentiments, with the host echoing such assertions as "Tony Abbott, after all, is a complete economic illiterate".
I was irritated enough to phone, but was refused going to air when I said the reason for calling was to provide a bit of balance and to ask that people give the new government a fair go before shooting them down in flames.

I haven't read the ACMA details yet but as you say above, they do require that complaints must first be made direct to the broadcaster and then if no adequate response is received within 60 days, then the complaint may be lodged with ACMA.

I've made a few protests to the above program in the past, only once receiving a brief and unhelpful reply from the host, eg "phone yourself and say what you want".  Yeah, right.  As above.  The producer doesn't accept the call.
Then the ABC separately has its own formal complaints procedure.  Pretty much the same applies as above.



MrBurns said:


> I love the ABC but I think they're getting out of hand, Jones looked the happiest I've seen him as he gave leading questions to the Indonesian MP.
> 
> It's becoming obvious now that the ABC is going to give this Govt a hard time no matter what they do.



Yes, during much of the election campaign I felt that Radio National at least was pretty fair in their commentary and interviewing.  But that all seems to be over now, and it's stick the boot in as much as possible.

I also overall highly value the ABC.  They have some wonderful programs.

Ijustnewit:  maybe a collective letter to Malcolm Turnbull?


----------



## DocK (19 September 2013)

craft said:


> Crikey I’m a feminazi and didn’t even know it (didn't even realise I could be one being a bloke and all). Must come from watching too much ABC.
> 
> If quality and experience doesn’t end up being broadly similar in the Liberal party to the wider demographics ie 50/50 ish then there is something systemically wrong in how opportunities to gain experience arise or how quality is judged.
> 
> ...






craft said:


> I’m pretty sure I didn’t advocate positive discrimination.  Just remove the systemic and pervasive negative discrimination and the ledger will balance itself out naturally over time– unless of course women are inferior – not a proposition I accept.  I also don’t think everybody who cares about a more balanced female representation in positions of power is a left wing nutter.
> 
> Anyrate happy to watch and see but 6 of 42 doesn’t inspire me initially – don’t know enough about what he’s facilitating lower down the organisation to have an objective opinion yet.
> 
> Exit stage LEFT.




I, at least, can see where you're coming from Craft.  My teenage son raised this issue last night - it was apparently a hot topic of debate between some of the year 12 students.  I gather that most of the girls in his group are MOST unimpressed with the lack of female representation in the cabinet, whereas most of the boys think the position should go to the person with the best credentials/ability regardless of gender.  I told him I agreed with both of those stated positions, but felt the better question is: "why are there so few eminent female politicians in the coalition, particularly when compared to the other major parties?  Certainly Sophie Mirrabella would have been in the inner cabinet had she retained her seat, but that still leaves a very unbalanced cabinet.  

I voted for the coalition, and would do so again regardless of this issue.  I don't necessarily see it as an Abbott failure, but I do wonder what's going on in the Liberal and National parties that results in a vast predominance of men in the senior positions.  Politics is certainly not for the faint-hearted, and by its very nature I think there may always be more men attracted to run for parliament than women - but Labor and the Greens seem able to attract and nurture a far greater % of female talent than the present government.  Even though I don't agree with a lot of the ideas, policies and often behaviour of the likes of Gillard, Roxon, Wong, Plibersek, Ellis of Labor, &  Hanson-Young, Milne & Waters of the Greens, as the examples that come most quickly to my mind - I do acknowledge and respect their intelligence and skills and abilities in their respective roles.  

It saddens me a little that the party that represents my values and ideals most closely also seems to value the contribution of my gender so little.  We live in a modern nation in an increasingly modernising world - why is half the population inadequately represented?


----------



## Julia (19 September 2013)

craft said:


> Crikey I’m a feminazi and didn’t even know it (didn't even realise I could be one being a bloke and all).



Sure you can.   They are all for no gender discrimination.



> If quality and experience doesn’t end up being broadly similar in the Liberal party to the wider demographics ie 50/50 ish then there is something systemically wrong in how opportunities to gain experience arise or how quality is judged.
> 
> Probably not Abbotts fault as he inherited an organisational culture. A reasonable question of him though, is in his nearly  four years at the top of the liberal party what’s happened to improve the situation so far?
> 
> I'm happy to give him a go and don’t buy the misogyny line but I would be disappointed if in his time some real progress is not made in evening up the ledger at the top.



He has said that their are several women 'knocking at the door of Cabinet'.  So let's see what happens in a few years' time.

Question for you:  If the choice is a front bench made up of the most experienced and best qualified people who largely happen to be male, do you consider still that that is less desirable than a front bench which offers equal numbers of gender, regardless of experience and capability?


----------



## craft (20 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Sure you can.   They are all for no gender discrimination.
> 
> 
> He has said that their are several women 'knocking at the door of Cabinet'.  So let's see what happens in a few years' time.
> ...




I said I wasn’t advocating positive discrimination hence I subscribe to merit and experience, but that doesn’t dismiss the fact that something is amiss here.   And it also leads to the question of merit according to whom? And experience on what criteria, surely the experience of being a female should be a highly prized experience when it is so underrepresented.

Actually can I just answer your question by saying ditto to DocK’s post – she has put the point I was trying to make much more eloquently then I can and probably in a much more palatable way.

I do think it’s wrong to dismiss the gender representation issue as a feminazi issue or a purely politically motivated argument from the other side.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2013)

craft said:


> ...If quality and experience doesn’t end up being broadly similar in the Liberal party to the wider demographics ie 50/50 ish then there is something systemically wrong in how opportunities to gain experience arise or how quality is judged....
> 
> I'm happy to give him a go and don’t buy the misogyny line but I would be disappointed if in his time some real progress is not made in evening up the ledger at the top.



With respect that sounds like Emilys List spin. We've seen how it worked out for the previous Labor/Green government.


----------



## craft (20 September 2013)

Logique said:


> With respect that sounds like Emilys List spin. We've seen how it worked out for the previous Labor/Green government.




I don’t know what Emilys list spin is – but having my personal beliefs likened to spin reminds me why I generally steer clear of politically motivated threads

I guess I’ve had my say - Have a good day.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2013)

Miranda Devine says it better than I can.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/
> 
> ..For all Gillard’s cynical pandering to mummy bloggers when she was PM, Labor’s quota system represents a narrow cadre of women whose outlook and experiences are wholly alien to the lives of most men and women, and contribute to the Labor Party’s disconnection from its base.
> 
> ...


----------



## McLovin (20 September 2013)

Logique said:


> With respect that sounds like Emilys List spin. We've seen how it worked out for the previous Labor/Green government.




I too have no idea what Emily's List spin is. But I think the point craft is trying to make is not to create a system of quotas but rather to have more women participating in politics so that the pool of available talent means more women can reach the cabinet on merit.

Doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.


----------



## MrBurns (20 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> I too have no idea what Emily's List spin is. But I think the point craft is trying to make is not to create a system of quotas but rather to have more women participating in politics so that the pool of available talent means more women can reach the cabinet on merit.
> 
> Doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.




One things for sure Abbott wouldn't have left women out on purpose , this has come about because he has simply placed the best people in the positions, in fact it is to his credit that he has avoided the temptation to include more women just to satisfy those who dwell on these things.....like as the media and opposition (what's left of it)


----------



## McLovin (20 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> One things for sure Abbott wouldn't have left women out on purpose , this has come about because he has simply placed the best people in the positions, in fact it is to his credit that he has avoided the temptation to include more women just to satisfy those who dwell on these things.....like as the media and opposition (what's left of it)




I don't think he left them out on purpose. I've never bought into the Abbott is sexist meme, although I do think some of his views on women are a bit dated. It's a shame though that a group that represents 50% of the population is so under-represented in government.


----------



## MrBurns (20 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> I don't think he left them out on purpose. I've never bought into the Abbott is sexist meme, although I do think some of his views on women are a bit dated. It's a shame though that a group that represents 50% of the population is so under-represented in government.




That's true, I'm sure he'll correct it when he can, it's a little too honest to have left women out, a bit politically naÃ¯ve I think......just leaves himself open to criticism from a few sides.


----------



## DocK (20 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Miranda Devine says it better than I can.




Thank you for that link, Logique - I enjoyed the article and agree with it on the whole.  This section:



> Equally, his refusal to promote women over more deserving male colleagues, just for diversity purposes, shows Abbott doesn’t care about the optics of government, unlike his Labor predecessors, who were consumed by them.
> 
> *That doesn’t mean it’s not disappointing there aren’t more women in Cabinet. But it’s hardly Abbott’s fault. The problem lies at the grass roots of recruitment. *
> 
> ...



(my bolds)
gets to the heart of where I'm coming from.  I agree with the selection of the best person for the job, regardless of gender, but I'm disheartened by the lack of women in the field.  Personally, I feel a lot of Australian women would feel better represented, and therefore more engaged with politics, were there a more even balance.  As has already been said, the challenge for Abbott, should he be interested in meeting it, is how to foster and encourage more female participation in his party.  Perhaps a more moderate government intent on staying out of our daily lives will go some way towards reducing the viciousness of the more personal attacks in the media at the very least - entering politics must have been seen as akin to voluntarily diving into a shark pool to young people over recent years.  A return to a little more dignity would be welcome, from both our pollies and the media.


----------



## Duckman#72 (20 September 2013)

The ABC bias is becoming even more pronounced.

A couple of points:

Firstly - Indonesia

The Indonesian PM who has been critical of Tony Abbott's "Turn the Boats Around" policy was introduced by Tony Jones the other night as:

TONY JONES:  _... *Indonesian MP Tantowi Yahya is a prominent member of his parliament’s Foreign Affairs Commission…* _?    

However when the SAME Indonesian was critical of the Gillard Government's position last year the intoduction by the ABC was with much less fanfare: 

MATT BROWN: _*Tantowi Yahya is a former host of Indonesia’s version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire, and he has a populist’s eye for how this will play out in Jakarta*. _

Surely the ABC wouldn't be trying to elevate Yahya's credentials now that the Coalition is in power?  

Secondly - Climate Change

The same day that Abbott announced that Flannery's position had been terminated, the ABC runs with a story about the melting of the ice caps and how the sea level will rise by up to a 1 metre over the next 100 years. Was I the only one that thought it was an ironic story to run, considering one of Flannery's most outrageous comments over the past 5 years related to significantly rises in sea levels that were completely over the top?

Thirdly - and this is just a comment. Is it just me or do other people think Wil Anderson is a complete tosser! I enjoy his shows, I just can't stand him. Words that come to mind are pompous, arrogant, self-serving and egotistical. Although to be fair, he is the funniest comedian in Australia - just ask him.

Lastly - I agree with Julia about Tony Delroy. What right has Tony got to be calling someone "economic illiterate"? 

Duckman


----------



## MrBurns (20 September 2013)

Yes this comment from the ABC web site - what a joke...........



> major elvis newton
> 
> 9:44 AM on 19/09/2013
> 
> ...


----------



## DocK (20 September 2013)

Duckman#72 said:


> The ABC bias is becoming even more pronounced.
> 
> A couple of points:
> 
> ...




I enjoy both Gruen Nation/Transfer  with Wil Anderson, and have also enjoyed Adam Hills over the years - but I too am becoming increasingly weary of them using their positions to ram their political views down our throats.  Hosting a tv show shouldn't be seen as a platform to advocate one's personal political views - unless it's a political tv show such as Bolt that doesn't even pretend to be neutral.  I stopped watching The Project on 10 for the same reason - Charlie Pickering can take self-righteousness to heights never before seen!


----------



## Country Lad (20 September 2013)

craft said:


> I don’t know what Emilys list spin is..........






McLovin said:


> I too have no idea what Emily's List spin is.





 Emily's List is a movements started to encourage and assist more Labor women to stand for parliament.  

Probably a good idea at the time but as happens in the Labor movement personal agendas get in the way.  Once Gillard became deputy Labor leader she and a few others hijacked it for the campaign of personal attacks on Abbott to make him appear "unelectable".

The Canberra division of this movement is known as "the handbag brigade".


----------



## Boggo (20 September 2013)

Country Lad said:


> The Canberra division of this movement is known as *"the handbag brigade"*.




And this is another example of their taxpayer funded exercises...
http://www.wgea.gov.au/


----------



## Julia (20 September 2013)

Logique said:


> With respect that sounds like Emilys List spin. We've seen how it worked out for the previous Labor/Green government.






craft said:


> I don’t know what Emilys list spin is – but having my personal beliefs likened to spin reminds me why I generally steer clear of politically motivated threads






Logique said:


> Miranda Devine says it better than I can.



Thanks, Logique.  Agree.
Craft, I think perhaps you're misinterpreting Logique's original remark which didn't suggest to me that he was accusing you of 'spin' but maybe rather that you have uncritically accepted Labor's spin.

Thanks to Country Lad for providing the background on Emily's List.


> Emily's List is a movements started to encourage and assist more Labor women to stand for parliament.
> 
> Probably a good idea at the time but as happens in the Labor movement personal agendas get in the way. Once Gillard became deputy Labor leader she and a few others hijacked it for the campaign of personal attacks on Abbott to make him appear "unelectable".
> 
> The Canberra division of this movement is known as "the handbag brigade".






MrBurns said:


> One things for sure Abbott wouldn't have left women out on purpose , this has come about because he has simply placed the best people in the positions, in fact it is to his credit that he has avoided the temptation to include more women just to satisfy those who dwell on these things.....like as the media and opposition (what's left of it)



I agree.  He would be entirely aware that there would be all the predictable indignation from the Left (and some of his own side) about the minimal representation of women.  Despite this, imo it's to his credit that he has promoted on merit.

I pointed out earlier that Mr Abbott had specifically referred to considerable talent 'knocking on the door'.
You could probably look at Kelly O'Dwyer as an example.  She's smart and articulate but doesn't quite yet imo have the gravitas necessary for a senior role.



McLovin said:


> I don't think he left them out on purpose. I've never bought into the Abbott is sexist meme, although I do think some of his views on women are a bit dated.



Such as?


----------



## Julia (20 September 2013)

Duckman#72 said:


> he same day that Abbott announced that Flannery's position had been terminated, the ABC runs with a story about the melting of the ice caps and how the sea level will rise by up to a 1 metre over the next 100 years. Was I the only one that thought it was an ironic story to run, considering one of Flannery's most outrageous comments over the past 5 years related to significantly rises in sea levels that were completely over the top?



No, Duckman, you were not the only one.  I was rolling my eyes also.  Especially when they flogged both stories one after the other time after time.


----------



## sails (20 September 2013)

Julia said:


> No, Duckman, you were not the only one.  I was rolling my eyes also.  Especially when they flogged both stories one after the other time after time.




I don't listen to the ABC too much, but I have my doubts they ran this story:



> Leaked United Nations report reveals the world's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years
> Politicians have raised concerns about the final draft
> Fears that the findings will encourage deniers of man-made climate change
> Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed.
> ...





Read more from the UK MailOnline:
World's top climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years


----------



## noco (20 September 2013)

Julia said:


> No, Duckman, you were not the only one.  I was rolling my eyes also.  Especially when they flogged both stories one after the other time after time.




+1 I say good riddance to bad rubbish. This Flannery has cost this country $billions and was paid $180,000 per annum for 3 days work a week. 

I hope Abbott has disposed of the other 1000 or so in Flannery's Climate Change department as well.

I believe there is something like $6 billion tied up in desal plants which are now in moth balls.

Good on Andrew Bolt for exposing this fraud and the Labor Party for the past 5 years.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...f-climate-career/story-fnihsr9v-1226723406045


----------



## noco (20 September 2013)

noco said:


> +1 I say good riddance to bad rubbish. This Flannery has cost this country $billions and was paid $180,000 per annum for 3 days work a week.
> 
> I hope Abbott has disposed of the other 1000 or so in Flannery's Climate Change department as well.
> 
> ...




Here with another link to the Climate Change Committee. I would like to know the exact number employed in this department and how they all fill in their time.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...mate-bureaucracy/story-e6frg6xf-1226723161774


----------



## noco (20 September 2013)

noco said:


> Here with another link to the Climate Change Committee. I would like to know the exact number employed in this department and how they all fill in their time.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...mate-bureaucracy/story-e6frg6xf-1226723161774




Andrew Bolts interveiw with Tim Flannery reveals we may not feel any effect from the carbon tax for 1000years.

Wow!!!!!!!!!! What a joke.




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...lumn_sacked_flannery_should_give_us_a_refund/


----------



## Julia (20 September 2013)

sails said:


> I don't listen to the ABC too much, but I have my doubts they ran this story:



Well, sails, I listen all the time to Radio National, Local Radio Network and Classic FM.
You are correct.  Absolutely no mention of the story you quote.  But we would expect nothing different, of course.


----------



## boofhead (20 September 2013)

Is the story based on misreading of the report where the same author wrote a similar storya year ago or so that also misread the report?


----------



## craft (21 September 2013)

Julia said:


> Thanks, Logique.  Agree.
> Craft, I think perhaps you're misinterpreting Logique's original remark which didn't suggest to me that he was accusing you of 'spin' but maybe rather that you have *uncritically accepted Labor's spin*.




Are you just taking the piss or are your actually serious when you write this type of stuff.

Preferring to see a gender representation that roughly reflect the population, which it would do naturally if MERIT was the only thing at play in an organisation does not make me a Labor Stooge.  I neither said it should be corrected over night or be brought about by quota’s or any other type of positive discrimination.   


ps

The ABC is not nearly as biased as biased people think it is.


----------



## sails (21 September 2013)

craft said:


> ..ps
> 
> The ABC is not nearly as biased as biased people think it is.





Those who are biased to the  left seem to be the ones mainly saying there is no bias in ABC politics. I suppose it is difficult to see bias when such  bias agrees with your own bias.

On that basis, Bolt is not nearly as biased as people think he is...


----------



## Julia (21 September 2013)

sails said:


> Those who are biased to the  left seem to be the ones mainly saying there is no bias in ABC politics. I suppose it is difficult to see bias when such  bias agrees with your own bias.
> 
> On that basis, Bolt is not nearly as biased as people think he is...



+1.

Even one of the ABC hosts, Rodd Quinn, said about two months ago, in a candid moment "We all know you have to vote Labor to get a job with the ABC".

And to expect a fifty/fifty gender balance in parliament, simply because that's representative of the population overall, is unrealistic and simplistic.  Given all the long hours and travel, time away from home and family, most women are not going to be attracted to politics as a career, especially when the job requires a thicker skin and a greater capacity to absorb pure nastiness than many women would want to cope with.

I do, however, admit to a bias in favour of the new government, a huge sense of relief that the Labor circus has gone, so am undoubtedly more prepared than those on the Left to give Tony Abbott's judgement a chance.


----------



## DocK (21 September 2013)

Julia said:


> +1.
> 
> Even one of the ABC hosts, Rodd Quinn, said about two months ago, in a candid moment "We all know you have to vote Labor to get a job with the ABC".
> 
> ...




I can't recall any on this thread expressing an expectation to see a fifty/fifty gender balance, simply a desire to see *more* women in parliament.  I believe a government should "represent" the people - and women make up 50% or more of the people.  One of my earlier posts touched on some of the barriers to entering politics that you have repeated above - namely the travel, time away from family and the viciousness involved in politics, particularly in recent years.  I, too, am biased favourably towards the present government.  That doesn't stop me from hoping that some of the present barriers may prove to be less surmountable in the future, and that Abbott may do all in his power to encourage more active female participation in the field.  Our society is making strides towards more equitable sharing of child-rearing and household duties, and an improvement in child-care facilities would certainly help in this regard.  Why does nobody think twice about male politicians leaving their wives and children to fend for themselves for long periods to be perfectly normal, yet if a woman does likewise it's often viewed as aberrant behaviour?  Are not men able to care for their children and homes just as well as women?  In this day and age do we still cling to outdated views that only mothers are able to provide a nurturing environment for children and fathers exist purely to provide funding and the odd bit of discipline?  Tony Abbott seems to be on the right course to deny the media the constant feeding frenzy they've become used to - let us hope our current politicians on all sides have learnt that the general population is tired of the nastiness and personal attacks.  

My personal hope is for a greater balance.  That doesn't necessarily mean a 50/50 split, but it also would be a far cry from the dearth of females we now have.  Today's young women often have far thicker skins than their mothers' generation, and have been educated to believe they deserve the same opportunities in life as men.  I'd like to see more of them enter, and thrive, in *all* the major political parties.  I don't consider that hope to be at all unrealistic or simplistic, but it will take both time and a real willingness to foster equality from the coalition's current leadership.


----------



## dutchie (21 September 2013)

DocK said:


> Are not men able to care for their children and homes just as well as women?  In this day and age do we still cling to outdated views that only mothers are able to provide a nurturing environment for children and fathers exist purely to provide funding and the odd bit of discipline?




A bit off topic I know,  but ask the Family Court that question.


----------



## sails (21 September 2013)

dutchie said:


> A bit off topic I know,  but ask the Family Court that question.




Too true, Dutchie. It cost my son many thousands of dollars to spend regular time with his kids. Ended up costing him his job as well. It seems even good dads dedicated to their kids have costly court battles if the mother chooses to deny him his kids.


----------



## IFocus (21 September 2013)

craft said:


> The ABC is not nearly as biased as biased people think it is.





The ABC is a shocker for left wing bias Barry Cassidy should hang his head in shame  





> Kevin Rudd entrenched smart-alec politics right from the start. He and his minders set about trying to manage the 24-hour news cycle.
> 
> So much useless information was collected and disseminated. Interviews were arranged for the sake of it. Junior staff would arrive at work at 4.30am to prepare media breakdowns for the more senior staff who would be on deck by 6am.
> 
> Eventually trite political lines would be force fed to chosen senior ministers, and they in turn acted as spruikers, snake oil salesmen, for a government obsessed with spin.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-20/cassidy-abbott-wise-to-pull-back-but-not-too-far/4969208


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> The ABC is a shocker for left wing bias Barry Cassidy should hang his head in shame
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-20/cassidy-abbott-wise-to-pull-back-but-not-too-far/4969208



Wasn't it Barrie Cassidy that ultimately lit the flame under Julia Gillard leadership on behalf of Kevin Rudd ?

Kevin Rudd though in the end was a loser and a loser is nobody's hero.


----------



## IFocus (21 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> Wasn't it Barrie Cassidy that ultimately lit the flame under Julia Gillard leadership on behalf of Kevin Rudd ?
> 
> Kevin Rudd though in the end was a loser and a loser is nobody's hero.




I don't believe so he just reported what he had heard no different than Laurie Oakes.


----------



## drsmith (21 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> I don't believe so he just reported what he had heard no different than Laurie Oakes.



I remember watching Insiders that morning. It was the big announcement from Barrie Cassidy from which Julia Gillard was dead PM walking.


----------



## Julia (21 September 2013)

DocK said:


> I can't recall any on this thread expressing an expectation to see a fifty/fifty gender balance,



This is what I was responding to:


> Preferring to see a gender representation that roughly reflect the population, which it would do naturally if MERIT was the only thing at play in an organisation




And you yourself seem to be saying something similar.


> I believe a government should "represent" the people - and women make up 50% or more of the people.





Of course, in an ideal world I'd also like to see equal representation in the parliament.  But if the experience and talent simply isn't there right now for the Coalition, I'm happy to give the nominated front bench a chance to show what they can do.  At the same time, hopefully the less experienced but potentially capable women in the party will in a few years' time be ready for promotion.



> One of my earlier posts touched on some of the barriers to entering politics that you have repeated above - namely the travel, time away from family and the viciousness involved in politics, particularly in recent years.  I, too, am biased favourably towards the present government.  That doesn't stop me from hoping that some of the present barriers may prove to be less surmountable in the future, and that Abbott may do all in his power to encourage more active female participation in the field.



Of course.  But it's still up to women to put themselves forward if that's the career they want.  Having had a job which involved a lot of time away from home and a lot of travel, I found it difficult enough without worrying about the home situation.   I'd never have done it when my stepdaughters were young.



> Our society is making strides towards more equitable sharing of child-rearing and household duties, and an improvement in child-care facilities would certainly help in this regard.  Why does nobody think twice about male politicians leaving their wives and children to fend for themselves for long periods to be perfectly normal, yet if a woman does likewise it's often viewed as aberrant behaviour?



I don't think anyone is suggesting it's aberrant behaviour.   But neither do I think you can entirely dismiss the fundamental strong nurturing instinct that often will mean a woman will choose a career path which doesn't take her away from her family for extended periods of time.



> Are not men able to care for their children and homes just as well as women?



If they want to, yes, of course they are.   The numbers of men actually doing this, however, across our society seem to indicate that they are still in a minority.



> In this day and age do we still cling to outdated views that only mothers are able to provide a nurturing environment for children and fathers exist purely to provide funding and the odd bit of discipline?



I don't think so, by and large.  *But it still comes down to the individual woman's choice.  I think women can do whatever they want to, and certainly they don't have to fight for recognition and equality nearly as hard these days as when I was 20 or even 30.*

Now the pendulum sometimes seems to have swung far in the other direction with some women becoming so precious that they declare themselves insulted if a bloke holds a door open for them!



> Tony Abbott seems to be on the right course to deny the media the constant feeding frenzy they've become used to - let us hope our current politicians on all sides have learnt that the general population is tired of the nastiness and personal attacks.



 I won't be holding my breath in that regard, but fervently share your hope.  A good deal of it is, in fact, media provoked, in order to give themselves something to talk and write about.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (21 September 2013)

It will be interesting to see how the Prime Minister approaches any reform of the ABC.

It certainly needs a shakeup.

It excludes those in the Centre and on the Right, in it's programming and commentators.

The Left will be bereft, losing all that unearned media power, and I doubt if anyone in the ALP or LNP will be in mourning.

Perhaps the Greens might be upset, then again they are few and far between.

The ABC needs to represent all Australians from all regions, cultures and demographics, instead of the Left Elites in the cities.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It will be interesting to see how the Prime Minister approaches any reform of the ABC.
> 
> It certainly needs a shakeup.
> 
> ...




Should anyone be in any doubt about the above, I timed the content on Insiders this morning run by former Whitlam staffer Barrie Cassidy. Just a few days after the swearing in of a Coalition Government this was the content in minutes.

ALP                42 minutes
Coalition            7 minutes
Australia Future   3 minutes
Leftie Cartoon     3 minutes
Greens              0 minutes
Barrie getting lost or cutting off Piers Akerman 4 minutes

At least they got the Greens correct.

gg


----------



## drsmith (22 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I timed the content on Insiders this morning run by former Whitlam staffer Barrie Cassidy.
> 
> ALP                42 minutes
> Coalition            7 minutes



Obviously a good week for the Coalition.


----------



## Logique (23 September 2013)

> Posted by: *Julia*
> 
> ...Of course, in an ideal world I'd also like to see equal representation in the parliament. But if the experience and talent simply isn't there right now for the Coalition, I'm happy to give the nominated front bench a chance to show what they can do...



Here here!  

These days, talented women have better opportunities than to be in politics. Political parties ought to be to be getting in early - capture the talented women before, or as, they head off to law, medicine, business, academia, teaching etc. 

An example I often use, how good would Gail Kelly have been as a national leader - but why should she take a pay cut?

You don't get the best people via some arbitrary quota...ask any head hunter or HR manager. Look at what happened in the Gillard/Rudd government. Australians voted them out, resoundingly. 

Although with Julia Gillard, I think it showed that she was thrust into the PM role too early in her career.


----------



## drsmith (23 September 2013)

David Suzuki is the lone panellist on tonight's Q&A.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/

A sample of what to expect,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-20/david-suzuki-questions-abbot-governments-stance/4970500

The ABC has obviously granted his wish on how he likes to conduct a debate as he outlined in the last minute of the video link above.


----------



## Ijustnewit (23 September 2013)

Why does the ABC now find it necessary to open up a "Have Your Say" comments page on every Coalition related story on their News website ? I can't remember this happening as frequently when Labor was in power and stuffing up on a daily basis. It is also not surprising the comments are nearly all anti Coalition and are all voted up. I like others have tried to "Have Your Say" but alas never seem to get past the editor...funny that.


----------



## noco (24 September 2013)

drsmith said:


> David Suzuki is the lone panellist on tonight's Q&A.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/
> 
> ...





I watched the David Suzuki show on qanda last night and I have not seen a man make such a fool of himself in answering question. It got to the point of total embarrasment whereby he often admiitted he did not know or admitted he may have made a mistake.  

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...te_know_nothing_by_very_first_question_on_qa/

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...proves_hes_pig_ignorant_about_global_warming/


----------



## MrBurns (24 September 2013)

noco said:


> I watched the David Suzuki show on qanda last night and I have seen a man make such a fool of himself in answering question. It got to the point of total embarrasment whereby he often admiitted he did not know or admitted he may have made a mistake.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...proves_hes_pig_ignorant_about_global_warming/




Yes he seemed more like an observer than an expert"
He did light up when he bagged Abbott much to the delight of the audience.


----------



## drsmith (24 September 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Yes he seemed more like an observer than an expert"



And one who is obviously not too keen on free speech, a point that was not lost on Greg Hunt in the Lateline interview that followed.


----------



## Logique (25 September 2013)

Miranda Devine neatly skewers an eco-poseur: http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/
> ...DAVID Suzuki’s appearance on the ABC flagship program Q&A spelled the death of any credibility left in the fag end of the climate alarm movement.
> 
> The affable climate alarmist is described by his acolytes in the Australian media as “iconic scientist and thinker”. He is really the Canadian Tim Flannery, with an expertise in insects rather than mammals...
> ...


----------



## Ijustnewit (25 September 2013)

Well they are at it again today , this time on University places . Christopher Pyne says he is not changing the election promise of* not* capping places . But the ABC continues to skewer the story and again opens up a comments page so the Leftist nutters can vent and call him a liar. The ABC is clearly out of control and determined to undermine the new Government a every chance. 

www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-25/pyne-education-university-fees-student-unions/4979282


----------



## MrBurns (25 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Well they are at it again today , this time on University places . Christopher Pyne says he is not changing the election promise of* not* capping places . But the ABC continues to skewer the story and again opens up a comments page so the Leftist nutters can vent and call him a liar. The ABC is clearly out of control and determined to undermine the new Government a every chance.
> 
> www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-25/pyne-education-university-fees-student-unions/4979282




I saw that, I'm sick of it, I hope someone does something about these people and on public money too.


----------



## McLovin (25 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Well they are at it again today , this time on University places . Christopher Pyne says he is not changing the election promise of* not* capping places . But the ABC continues to skewer the story and again opens up a comments page so the Leftist nutters can vent and call him a liar. The ABC is clearly out of control and determined to undermine the new Government a every chance.
> 
> www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-25/pyne-education-university-fees-student-unions/4979282




New Ltd more to your liking?



> CAPS on university places could be reintroduced and compulsory student union fees would be axed under plans to overhaul the higher education system.
> 
> Education Minister Christopher Pyne’s office confirmed he was planning the overhaul and *said he was considering bringing back caps on university places *amid concerns the current demand-driven system was undermining quality.
> 
> ...




Read more: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/natio...up/story-fnii5yv4-1226726700700#ixzz2frnn0txc

Seriously, the way some of you guys tilt at windmills...


----------



## wayneL (25 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> New Ltd more to your liking?



Yes,

Not because it is biased the other way, but because it doesn't pretend not to be biased. It's a bit like the American commercial networks, biased as hell, but you know what flavour you're getting. They don't pretend to be anything but.

The sanctimonious, pious, purulent and putrid clowns at Pravda, purport to be unbiased. This is intellectual bankruptcy of the highest order.


> Seriously, the way some of you guys tilt at windmills...






Even Don Quixote would see the bias.


----------



## Whiskers (25 September 2013)

I could say I'm a bit bemused at this thread discussion... but I'm not!

“If one harbors anywhere in one's mind a nationalistic loyalty or hatred, certain facts, though in a sense known to be true, are inadmissable.” 
― George Orwell 


...to be continued.


----------



## wayneL (25 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> I could say I'm a bit bemused at this thread discussion... but I'm not!
> 
> “If one harbors anywhere in one's mind a nationalistic loyalty or hatred, certain facts, though in a sense known to be true, are inadmissable.”
> ― George Orwell
> ...




Do you have any thoughts of your own whiskers? I'd sure like to hear them - maybe, if not laced with haughty sermonizing and astonishing hypocrisy - rather than all these airy fairy quotations.

Quotations are fine, used sparingly, but FFS!


----------



## Miss Hale (25 September 2013)

McLovin said:


> New Ltd more to your liking?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




If I don't like what News Limited says I don't have  to buy it.  I pay for the ABC whether I like it or not, therefore I expect it to be unbiased not peddling an agenda.


----------



## Whiskers (26 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Do you have any thoughts of your own whiskers? I'd sure like to hear them - maybe, if not laced with haughty sermonizing and astonishing hypocrisy - rather than all these airy fairy quotations.
> 
> Quotations are fine, used sparingly, but FFS!




I did literally have a thought, which caused me to say. "I could say I'm a bit bemused at this thread discussion... but I'm not!"



wayneL said:


> Yes,
> 
> Not because it is biased the other way, but because it doesn't pretend not to be biased. It's a bit like the American commercial networks, biased as hell, but you know what flavour you're getting. They don't pretend to be anything but.
> 
> ...




Think about it! 

“It is only about things that do not interest one, that one can give a really unbiassed opinion; and this is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always valueless.” 
― Oscar Wilde

“You will not be punished for your anger; you will be punished by your anger.” 
― Gautama Buddha 

... to be continued.


----------



## wayneL (26 September 2013)

Whiskers,

Using quotations is nothing more than a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority. I'm sure I could find some dead guy's quotations to argue with your dead guy's quotations. But context is everything and without examining the same, those word are nothing more than waffle. We can find contradictory quotations of the same scriptures being used  to wage war even.

Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another. - Ambrose Bierce 

As such, a logical fallacy is... fallacious. So though Oscar, Mahatma et al may have had valid situations in which their utterances may have been apt, they are not for current Australian political debate.

If I may indulge in some excessive quotationism myself, your own Oscar Wilde said "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."

To heavily borrow from Joseph Roux, A fine quotation is a diamond in the hand of a man of wit and a pebble in the hand of a fool, their worth evident by how they are cast about.


----------



## Calliope (26 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> ... to be continued.




Another apt quotation;  "Does this guy ever shut up?"


----------



## drsmith (26 September 2013)

He who farts in church sits in his own pew.

Author unknown.


----------



## Whiskers (26 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Whiskers,
> 
> Using quotations is nothing more than a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority.




Well, let's consider this in the context of what I said!

Are you not complaining, even getting pretty annoyed, that the abc is biased?

Everyone is biased. There is no escaping that because we are all a product of our experiences and beliefs. Is that not a fact?

So, by definition any organisation or more particularly a programme on abc is biased by the people who produce it. I like their Landline which is biased to the rural sector, arguably the Nationals. They produce a gardening programme that arguably is biased to greens. Their 'The Business' programme  is liked by myself and liberal people I know, their 4 Corners programme is generally regarded as quality investigative current affairs programme as is the many scientific and children programs of their production and others. 

*What are you suggesting... that they and tv generally display another program classification identifying its political bias? Maybe all programs should display a warning like indigenous people request for the deceased and some customary practices... warning this program might be seen as biased by some people. *

Is it not more important to detach yourself emotionally from the bias of the presenter or program to work with the content?

I don't see any significant political complaints of bias, or more significantly demands for censuring anyone. Correct me there if I'm wrong. Rather, a competent politician faces bias everywhere, everyday and his/her job is to sway peoples bias to his/her bias. 

So, is the issue really about bias or more that you (and some others comments) simply have a strong emotional disposition to people from opposing experiences?

 "Our emotional disposition is the tendency towards the type of experience we have."


----------



## Whiskers (26 September 2013)

Now these dudes tend to work well with the content... 



Calliope said:


> Another apt quotation;  "Does this guy ever shut up?"




...but none-the-less emotional attachment to an opposing idea, bias, tending to more sarcastic denigration of the messenger... a degree of contempt for opposing bias...:




drsmith said:


> He who farts in church sits in his own pew.
> 
> Author unknown.




... and this dudes touch of dark humour points to the relative bias of friendship in times of trouble.


----------



## wayneL (26 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Well, let's consider this in the context of what I said!
> 
> Are you not complaining, even getting pretty annoyed, that the abc is biased?
> 
> ...




The simple suggestion is that the national broadcaster should be apolitical, whereas, as the title of this thread suggests, the ABC is political.


----------



## IFocus (26 September 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Well they are at it again today , this time on University places . Christopher Pyne says he is not changing the election promise of* not* capping places . But the ABC continues to skewer the story and again opens up a comments page so the Leftist nutters can vent and call him a liar. The ABC is clearly out of control and determined to undermine the new Government a every chance.
> 
> www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-25/pyne-education-university-fees-student-unions/4979282





Hmm actually Pyne is looking at capping but its actually a trojan horse for stripping funds out of uni's stay tuned another broken non core promise coming up.

ABC report facts not three worded slogans get use to it folks.


----------



## Whiskers (26 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> The simple suggestion is that the national broadcaster should be apolitical, whereas, as the title of this thread suggests, the ABC is political.




So to clarify apolitical... are you suggesting that the abc should be not involved or interested in politics to avoid the political bias you fret about?

... or that they should be politically neutral; without political attitudes, content, or bias?

Given as previously explained and not countered, bias is inherent in our human experience, that which makes us all individual. If we all had the same experience, thus bias, we'd all be the same... a clone.

Hence an unbiased opinion is always valueless and consequently inadmissible.

So, does it not get back to the notion of playing the ball rather than the person. That under-arm incident, that kiwi batsman's error in paying too much attention to the bowler, than watching the ball and doing what you need to do with the ball.


----------



## sptrawler (26 September 2013)

IFocus said:


> Hmm actually Pyne is looking at capping but its actually a trojan horse for stripping funds out of uni's stay tuned another broken non core promise coming up.
> 
> ABC report facts not three worded slogans get use to it folks.




I think some form of capping is required, having a system whereby everyone gets to the top, regardless of ability is stupid.
All that has happened is our education system has fallen to the lowest common denominator.
Labor legislating that make kids stay in school to year 12, has only resulted in a bottleneck of angry, frustrated 17yr olds.
They are expected to recieve 1st year apprentice wages, a first year electrical apprentice earns $274/wk.
The alternative is to stay at school, stay at home and go to Uni. lol
This social engineering project needs shutting down.
The system in place years ago worked well, why not return to the education principles of yester year. Oh sorry that wouldn't be politically correct, in todays world.
In todays world everyone is equal, untill you hit the jobs market, then all the smart ones get jobs.
The rest are left to wallow around in no mans land at 20 years old.


----------



## DocK (27 September 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I think some form of capping is required, having a system whereby everyone gets to the top, regardless of ability is stupid.
> All that has happened is our education system has fallen to the lowest common denominator.
> Labor legislating that make kids stay in school to year 12, has only resulted in a bottleneck of angry, frustrated 17yr olds.
> They are expected to recieve 1st year apprentice wages, a first year electrical apprentice earns $274/wk.
> ...




And those that find difficulty in getting the job they've spent years at uni training for (or not) often wallow around with a HECS debt that never gets fully repaid.


----------



## bellenuit (27 September 2013)

Another appalling interview this morning on ABC NewsRadio with a spokesperson to the Indonesian PM. When the spokesperson said she hadn't details of the policy but could foresee problems if the Australian Navy entered uninvited into Indonesian waters, the interviewer, completely ignoring the fact that Abbott/Bishop had clearly said that our navy will not encroach on Indonesian sovereign waters under its tow back the boats policy, pressed questions on possible conflict if that happened. At no time did the interviewer indicate that that was not Australia's policy, but kept trying to elicit responses that suggested potential for conflict, even though the spokesperson was careful to qualify the circumstances under which that would happen.

A few minutes later in their next cycle of news, they didn't broadcast the interview, but instead claimed that the spokesperson had suggested conflict was possible if Abbott/Bishop pursued their boat people policy, without making reference to the context within which that was said.


----------



## Ijustnewit (27 September 2013)

bellenuit said:


> Another appalling interview this morning on ABC NewsRadio with a spokesperson to the Indonesian PM. When the spokesperson said she hadn't details of the policy but could foresee problems if the Australian Navy entered uninvited into Indonesian waters, the interviewer, completely ignoring the fact that Abbott/Bishop had clearly said that our navy will not encroach on Indonesian sovereign waters under its tow back the boats policy, pressed questions on possible conflict if that happened. At no time did the interviewer indicate that that was not Australia's policy, but kept trying to elicit responses that suggested potential for conflict, even though the spokesperson was careful to qualify the circumstances under which that would happen.
> 
> A few minutes later in their next cycle of news, they didn't broadcast the interview, but instead claimed that the spokesperson had suggested conflict was possible if Abbott/Bishop pursued their boat people policy, without making reference to the context within which that was said.




Yes as expected the ABC is trying to kick more goals for Labor . They are beating this issue to death , also today they have given Chris Bowen another 30 minutes of air time to rave on and on . If you watched ABC News 24 and didn't know any different you'd think Labor was still in power. If that's not enough they have to use up more air time for another Labor Leaders debate. Then comes out the Climate Change news and programs that seemed to have increased ten fold since the election. When Labor lost the election they said they would not be drawn into the 24/7 News cycle like previously. Well that lasted 2 days , and it's business as usual thanks to the ABC. Someone should tell Shorten and Bowen to shut up .
Also I can't wait for the ABC Anne Summers Interview with Gillard, that will take the cake . Again the ABC in relation to this interview is showing selected clips of the famous misogyny speech , it is clearly just another chance for the ABC to take a free shot at Abbott.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 September 2013)

My contacts at a high level in Government tell me that the ABC is a dead parrot.



gg


----------



## Logique (27 September 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> If I don't like what News Limited says I don't have  to buy it.  I pay for the ABC whether I like it or not, therefore I expect it to be unbiased not peddling an agenda.



Agree, and sums it up. 

Time to rattle a few cages in these sheltered workshops of the Left. Do it early in the term. 

54% of voters supported the conservatives earlier in the month. That's the balance now required from the national broadcaster.


----------



## wayneL (27 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> So to clarify apolitical... are you suggesting that the abc should be not involved or interested in politics to avoid the political bias you fret about?
> 
> ... or that they should be politically neutral; without political attitudes, content, or bias?




Perhaps apolitical was a poor word choice, politically neutral would be better. But that does not mean there should be no political content, that's ridiculous and I think you're building a straw man there. Rather, that political news should be reported, giving equal opportunity to fairly represent each party's point of view. The left seems to think it is possible with gender, why not ideology?



> Given as previously explained and not countered, bias is inherent in our human experience, that which makes us all individual. If we all had the same experience, thus bias, we'd all be the same... a clone.
> 
> Hence an unbiased opinion is always valueless and consequently inadmissible.




I agree bias is inherent, but I think it is ludicrous that journo's cannot set aside most of that bias in their reportage... equally ludicrous and a very long bow the contention that an unbiased opinion is valueless and inadmissable. Proper analysis will always contain the minimum of bias.



> So, does it not get back to the notion of playing the ball rather than the person. That under-arm incident, that kiwi batsman's error in paying too much attention to the bowler, than watching the ball and doing what you need to do with the ball.




? Poor analogy, because your point is nebulous.


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2013)

Logique said:


> Agree, and sums it up.
> 
> Time to rattle a few cages in these sheltered workshops of the Left. Do it early in the term.
> 
> 54% of voters supported the conservatives earlier in the month. That's the balance now required from the national broadcaster.




Just a 50/50 balanced view would be appreciated. 
I haven't watched the ABC, due to their obvious political bias, for years.
As Miss Hale says, that shouldn't be the case, we all pay for it through our taxes.
Therefore it should attempt to be unbiased, if it can't, sadly it will lead to its demise.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> My contacts at a high level in Government tell me that the ABC is a dead parrot.
> 
> 
> 
> gg





Whether you are ALP or LNP Coalition, you must agree that the ABC is controlled by fey appartchiks and hairly legged feminists.

These left of ALP muppets are not representitive of the Australian population and need to be retired.

A good example is the refusal of management to grant Leigh Sales the governship of the recent election coverage, rather using a resurrected Whitlam era Red Kerry to lead a biased programme.

Let us have a clean broom through the ABC, our broadcaster, not that of green scratchie ideologues.

gg


----------



## drsmith (27 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> A good example is the refusal of management to grant Leigh Sales the governship of the recent election coverage, rather using a resurrected Whitlam era Red Kerry to lead a biased programme.



Maybe next time GG.


----------



## noco (27 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Whether you are ALP or LNP Coalition, you must agree that the ABC is controlled by fey appartchiks and hairly legged feminists.
> 
> These left of ALP muppets are not representitive of the Australian population and need to be retired.
> 
> ...




GG,I am certain Abbott will be doing lots of ethnic cleansing of the ABC in the next few weeks.

It is most likely to be lower down the list of priorities.


----------



## Whiskers (27 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Perhaps apolitical was a poor word choice,




I thought so too... but...



> politically neutral would be better. But that does not mean there should be no political content, that's ridiculous and




Agree in theory. 



> I think you're building a straw man there.




I think you're wrong for the same reason you saw 'apolitical' was a poor choice. You have tended to generalise to  counter with a superficially similar but strictly different meaning.  



> Rather, that political news should be reported, giving equal opportunity to fairly represent each party's point of view. The left seems to think it is possible with gender, why not ideology? I agree bias is inherent, but




Agree in theory, or rather philosophy again... because theoretically it depends how 'equal opportunity' and 'fairly' is applied... because it requires more subjective measures upon inherent biases. Just like poll results, the perception of their bias by a wider sample will change from week to week. How often do you sack people and replace them with another? What criteria do you use to repopulate the abc? 

It'll become as slippery as the proverbial butchers d!@k once you start trying to carve it up. 



> I think it is ludicrous that journo's cannot set aside most of that bias in their reportage...




This is getting away from the strict (albeit a bit sarcastic) point of my original critique, but again I don't disagree here.



> equally ludicrous and a very long bow the contention that an unbiased opinion is valueless and inadmissable.




Think about this a bit more... doesn't 'Ãºnbiased' mean, having no bias... by definition mean not having an opinion. So if your opinion is that you have no 'opinion', by definition is valueless and follows if it has no value it's inadmissible... think in terms of law or scientific research. 



> Proper analysis will always contain the minimum of bias.




For the strictly technical and sarcastic point I originally said "I could say I'm a bit bemused at this thread discussion... but I'm not!" a minimum of bias is still not unbiased, non political or apolitical. 



> ? Poor analogy, because your point is nebulous.




On the contrary, as you partly acknowledged and I emphatically insist, : it was your idea that was unclear, vague, or ill-defined. Just like one is either pregnant or not pregnant, there is no in-between, everyone has inherent bias , no just a little pregnant.

But I think I've established I understand and agree with the sentiment of the thread, but for the purely strict technical argument of my sarcastic point, it demonstrates how our inherent bias allows us to rashly label or perceive things, not necessarily strictly correctly.


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2013)

Just two points, as the rest of your post Ruddesque waffle, unworthy of a response.



Whiskers said:


> Think about this a bit more... doesn't 'Ãºnbiased' mean, having no bias... by definition mean not having an opinion. So if your opinion is that you have no 'opinion', by definition is valueless and follows if it has no value it's inadmissible... think in terms of law or scientific research.




No, absolutely not. Evidence the politicized and parlous state of climate science. In journalism there is reportage and opinion pieces. In most media, the difference is somehow delineated; Op-Eds and blogs are expected to contain a bias and are clearly identified by the Author's person. Reportage is different, look at the way the ABC has been reporting the Indonesia diplomacy, clearly designed to damage the government.

It is putrid and wrong on several levels.



> But I think I've established I understand and agree with the sentiment of the thread, but for the purely strict technical argument of my sarcastic point, it demonstrates how our inherent bias allows us to rashly label or perceive things, not necessarily strictly correctly.




So what you are saying here in a convoluted and typically nebulous way, is that you don't believe the ABC is biased?

Haven't you just contradicted yourself?


----------



## Whiskers (28 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Just two points, as the rest of your post Ruddesque waffle, unworthy of a response.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Hey... enough of the playing the person! You've lost sight of the ball. This is the same hypocritical intolerance you are complaining of about the abc.

Didn't you start bowling off line when you claimed I, but it was actually you who, started introducing straw man arguments! You have lost sight or got blurred vision again, introducing another similar but different term, reportage. But reportage, the act or process of reporting news, is also doomed to bias and opinion.



> So what you are saying here in a convoluted and typically nebulous way,




Asked and answered previously!

Move on councillor! 

:



> is that you don't believe the ABC is biased?




On the contrary, I agreed it was biased. I've also gone to length to explain that by virtue that it involves human opinion and or judgement it is, and you agreed, it is inherently biased. 



> Haven't you just contradicted yourself?




No! As outlined again, your comments attest to your asserting something different to deny the truth.
--------------
Judgement
The abc is, argued and accepted by all parties to be, biased. The Court (of public opinion) agrees.

Orders
Judge: So what the hell do you want the Court to do about it? What do you propose to do with the abc to control the damn [old kiwi saying] slippery as a butchers pr!ck, bias!?

Submissions
Judge: The applicant seems to be advocating more balanced reporting... balanced? Whom is it unbalanced toward? 
The applicant: Labor!
The defendant: Labor!
Judge: Who do you want it more biased toward?
Applicant: We want it to be fair... more Big L Liberal!
defendant: Hell I don't know sir! I just play the ball sir (watch the programs I like eg Landline, The Business) and let the wide ones go by to the keeper.
Cries from the gallery: more to the Greens
Cries from the gallery: THE SEX PARTY
Cries from the gallery: The motoring enthusiasts party!
Cries from the gallery: Rupert Murdock!

Judge: ORDER, ORDER!
Judge: How do you propose to measure how much bias the abc should have to everyone?
Applicant: Just let  Rupert Murdock run it, he'll gloat that he's a capitalist pig and nobody will be able to complain that he's pretending to not be biased! 
Judge: Huh! 
Defendant: Don't look at me your honour, I'm not touching that damn (old kiwi saying) thing. :disgust:
Judge: Well if it should represent the public fairly, it should represent each political party equally, in each state broadcast area, right? ... or was that the number of seats they won at last election?... maybe the votes they won?... maybe the national average of the parties?... votes?... or seats won?...   

So who is going to nominate a formula that will decide what is fair and unbiased to everyone!?

Thinking, thinking...

Sometimes you just have to be very careful what you wish for. When you look at the individual party or population counts, Labor is often the highest count in it's own right anyway. Could it be that the abc is biased to Labor at least partly because the majority of the population is predisposed to Labor and its close allies philosophically?


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2013)

Ad hom? Where are these purported straw-man arguments of mine then? 

....and try to keep answers succinct, if you recall, the last waffler was voted off the island.


----------



## Whiskers (28 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Ad hom? Where are these purported straw-man arguments of mine then?
> 
> ....and try to keep answers succinct, if you recall, the last waffler was voted off the island.




Sounds like a threat of prohibition...

“Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.” 
― Abraham Lincoln 

“Prohibition is the trigger of crime.” 
― Ian Fleming

Again you chose a new word to deflect the issue!

Older and wiser heads, even if they are dead, have long had the simple answer to that... and history is the Judge!


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Sounds like a threat of prohibition...
> 
> “Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.”
> ― Abraham Lincoln
> ...




Sounds like non-sequitur. The observation that the second last of the great wafflers was unceremoniously kicked out of office, contains to inference of any 'prohibition' here.

I remind you that the particular waffler in question was deposed via the democratic process, not via autocratic action, so please desist with the histrionics.

Right, that is out of the way, now could you please answer my question as to my purported straw-man argument, rather than indulging in an amateur attempt at intellectual subterfuge.


----------



## Whiskers (28 September 2013)

wayneL said:


> Sounds like non-sequitur. The observation that the second last of the great wafflers was unceremoniously kicked out of office, contains to inference of any 'prohibition' here.
> 
> I remind you that the particular waffler in question was deposed via the democratic process, not via autocratic action, so please desist with the histrionics.
> 
> Right, that is out of the way, now could you please answer my question as to my purported straw-man argument, rather than indulging in an amateur attempt at intellectual subterfuge.




If you understood that "democratic process" is also a bias, arguably for popularity or at least better representation of the populous opinion, but a bias none the less, you would likely see your straw man.


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2013)

Whiskers said:


> If you understood that "democratic process" is also a bias, arguably for popularity or at least better representation of the populous opinion, but a bias none the less, you would likely see your straw man.




_Spucatum tauri!_ That is as fallacious an argument as I've ever seen and nothing whatever to do with a Straw man argument.

The democratic process is what it is, and not connected to public broadcasting. The Overarching point in this thread is that a *public* broadcaster should not seek to influence the democratic process, merely equip people with the information needed to make their own decision.

Influence should be left to (oh so transparent) commercial and ideological interests such as News.com, Get up, The Fabian society, et al.


----------



## Whiskers (28 September 2013)

This is looking like a couple of people have little else to do on a Saturday afternoon. 

Oh well...

Damn, freo got done! Nice clean white looks better than black and yellow!



wayneL said:


> _Spucatum tauri!_



... helps hold together straw nicely!  :



> The democratic process is what it is, and not connected to public broadcasting. The Overarching point in this thread is that a *public* broadcaster should not seek to influence the democratic process, merely equip people with the information needed to make their own decision.




One thing to get ones nickers in a knot from the sideline of the game, but...
Given the Charter of the abc states inter alia to provide:

(i) broadcasting programs that contribute to a sense of national identity and inform and entertain,
and reflect the cultural diversity of, the Australian community​and,
the Corporation shall take account of:
(i) the broadcasting services provided by the commercial and public sectors of the Australian
broadcasting system;​
*So, the point I'm curious about is how do you propose to fix this bias?*

Change the charter, change the board?


----------



## noco (28 September 2013)

So, the point I'm curious about is how do you propose to fix this bias?

Change the charter, change the board? 

Ethnic cleansing of the lefties....."sackem".


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 September 2013)

noco said:


> So, the point I'm curious about is how do you propose to fix this bias?
> 
> Change the charter, change the board?
> 
> Ethnic cleansing of the lefties....."sackem".




It is quite easy.

And it is being implemented as we post.

The ABC is just another QANGO and it will be adjusted as the needs of the nation shift.

The left wing jokers who live the high life off the ABC, as I post are fleeing for gentler pastures.

gg


----------



## noco (28 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is quite easy.
> 
> And it is being implemented as we post.
> 
> ...




Good news GG. The sooner the better...........the ABC have become more biased than ever in these last couple of years........THE Labor Party have been very cunning in making sure they selected red raggers and left wing socialists.


----------



## bellenuit (28 September 2013)

More misrepresentation of what Abbott said from the ABC.....

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ch-from-the-abc-irritants-or-toxic-waste.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 September 2013)

noco said:


> Good news GG. The sooner the better...........the ABC have become more biased than ever in these last couple of years........THE Labor Party have been very cunning in making sure they selected red raggers and left wing socialists.




Next Thursday will be the beginning of the end of a self indulgent elite who run the ABC, I am told.

gg


----------



## Whiskers (28 September 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Next Thursday will be the beginning of the end of a self indulgent elite who run the ABC, I am told.
> 
> gg




Board change?... Budget cuts?


----------



## drsmith (1 October 2013)

On the QandA program's website, the ABC published this text,



> I could watch #qanda, or I could carefully massage Abbott's [redacted] with that dangly thing at the back of my throat. Decisions, decisions.




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...thing-at-the-back-of-the-throat.html#comments


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2013)

The ABC reporters will end up losing us an icon, on behalf of the unions.IMO

Why can't they just present unbiased news, what they were renowned for.

Who cares if it is bad for Labor or Liberal, as long as it is factual and not embelished with personal bent.

That would be nice.

If they can't provide that service, it isn't a service.  Just a public funded agenda.


----------



## Chris45 (10 October 2013)

Don't know how many saw Tony Jones' faux pas on Lateline last night when, during an introduction, he referred to, "Tony Rabbit ... er ... Abbott".
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3865843.htm

Good one Jones!  You've just lost quite a bit of your credibility.

Clive Palmer seems to have Jones' measure. Good interview!
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3865849.htm


----------



## MrBurns (10 October 2013)

The ABC has featured this shot of Abbott looking sly and plastered it over the fron page of their web site, I'm developing a genuine dislike for these bludgers.

This was deliberate absolutely no doubt about it.


----------



## Chris45 (11 October 2013)

Looks like Tony Jones has been sin-binned for the rest of the year (or has sin-binned himself).

Last night the "Tony Rabbit" faux pas, tonight Jones announced he was taking the rest of the year off ... interesting!


----------



## MrBurns (11 October 2013)

Chris45 said:


> Looks like Tony Jones has been sin-binned for the rest of the year (or has sin-binned himself).
> 
> Last night the "Tony Rabbit" faux pas, tonight Jones announced he was taking the rest of the year off ... interesting!




Yes that was sudden and unexpected, 
Couldn't he just be a bit impartial without needing to be taken off air?
I expect there was an argument and his ego took over.


----------



## banco (11 October 2013)

sptrawler said:


> The ABC reporters will end up losing us an icon, on behalf of the unions.IMO
> 
> Why can't they just present unbiased news, what they were renowned for.
> 
> :




When were they renowned for this?  At least since the seventies they've leaned noticeably to the left.


----------



## MrBurns (11 October 2013)

banco said:


> When were they renowned for this?  At least since the seventies they've leaned noticeably to the left.




It's more obvious now, I think that's why Jones was moved on so suddenly.


----------



## noco (11 October 2013)

Chris45 said:


> Looks like Tony Jones has been sin-binned for the rest of the year (or has sin-binned himself).
> 
> Last night the "Tony Rabbit" faux pas, tonight Jones announced he was taking the rest of the year off ... interesting!




Did he fall or was he pushed? .....As GG stated, "there will more to go".

Tony Jones has been blatantly biased towards the Labor Party for some time and I not surprised he has seen the writing on the wall..


----------



## MrBurns (11 October 2013)

noco said:


> Did he fall or was he pushed? .....As GG stated, "there will more to go".
> 
> Tony Jones has been blatantly biased towards the Labor Party for some time and I not surprised he has seen the writing on the wall..




I bet he was told to back off and didn't like it so stepped down for a while.


----------



## Chris45 (11 October 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I bet he was told to back off and didn't like it so stepped down for a while.



He may have been joking about the "Rabbit" nickname with someone off air and then let it drop in a Freudian slip and I suspect it was suggested that it was time to take his long service leave. He said he'll be back in the chair next year.

As a leftist ABC interviewer, he hasn't been too bad and certainly not as bad as Kerry O'Brien became before he was switched to 4 Corners soon after his obnoxious "gotcha" interview with Tony Abbott over the NBN Mbps and peak speed stuff. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWAN5zkEaok

I bet O'Brien studied all day to get his head around Mbps and peak speed and he thought he could nail Abbott on the NBN technical details and I thought Abbott acquitted himself reasonably well considering.

Maybe the ABC will recruit David Marr again to fill the Lateline chair in Jones' absence ... or better still David Marr and Andrew Bolt co-hosting.


----------



## drsmith (11 October 2013)

Interesting take on the ABC and Clive Palmer,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...unusually-good-relationship-with-the-abc.html

If true, Michael Smith's commentary about Clive's nickel refinery in Townsville and resort at Coolum are particularly interesting as is one of the reader's comments about optional preferential voting in some states.


----------



## Julia (11 October 2013)

drsmith said:


> Interesting take on the ABC and Clive Palmer,



7.30 last night featured Clive lining up his new senators-elect in a comical stilted rehearsed performance where they introduced one another.
Each, including new recruit, Ricky Muir whose connections now to his original party seem somewhat tenuous, nervously delivered their lines.  A couple of journalists attempted questions of individuals but Clive quickly put a stop to that nonsense!
They're a joke, but no doubt a dangerous one with the potential to cause considerable mischief, not on grounds of genuine policy, but in order to avenge Clive's old antagonisms.


----------



## Chris45 (11 October 2013)

Julia said:


> A couple of journalists attempted questions of individuals but Clive quickly put a stop to that nonsense!



I don't blame him! The media attack dogs would tear those four greenhorns apart if given the chance. I imagine Clive will be tightly managing his little flock as they move forward and there will be much rehearsing of lines in the party room before they make their media appearances. I wonder if any of them will make lone appearances on 7:30 or Lateline.

I can see Joh Bjelke Petersen's influence in Clive's media style and I wonder when we'll hear the first, "Now don't you worry about that"?


----------



## DB008 (14 October 2013)

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/10/now-more-than-ever-the-abc-should-stand-on-its-own-two-feet-and-drop-the-pretence.html

...and...

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/06/the-abc-doesnt-want-to-know-about-julia-gillard-and-the-police-enquiry-when-its-paid-1-billion-per-a.html


----------



## noco (16 October 2013)

Just another case of blantant bias by the ABC ......Cassidy on Sundays INSIDERS  was very kind and gentle on Slipper when in fact he should have asked Slipper some more pertinent questions.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...slipper-delusion/story-e6frg7bo-1226740546083


----------



## Julia (16 October 2013)

I'm sure it didn't take Janet Albrechtson's article for anyone other than the most devout fan to feel pretty scornful about Barrie Cassidy offering the odious Slipper such an uncritical platform for his whining.
I don't know how Mr Cassidy isn't overcome by embarrassment at his own performance.


----------



## wayneL (16 October 2013)

Julia said:


> I'm sure it didn't take Janet Albrechtson's article for anyone other than the most devout fan to feel pretty scornful about Barrie Cassidy offering the odious Slipper such an uncritical platform for his whining.
> I don't know how Mr Cassidy isn't overcome by embarrassment at his own performance.




Julia, Have you forgotten the findings of my peer reviewed PhD thesis "The Impossibility of Objectivity in Leftist Thought and Ideology"? It has now been accepted into scientific canon and known in rarefied intellectual circles as "wayneL's Law".

_Ipso facto_, there is 0% probability that Cassidy feels any sort of embarrassment at all, or any recognition by a large proportion of ABC devotees of any academic impropriety on his part.


----------



## Julia (16 October 2013)

Thank you for the reminder, Wayne.  Foolish of me, of course.


----------



## drsmith (16 October 2013)

wayneL said:


> "The Impossibility of Objectivity in Leftist Thought and Ideology"



To get them to start reading it, you might need a more politically correct title.  

"The Challenge of Objectivity in Social Progressive Perception and Context"


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 October 2013)

wayneL said:


> Julia, Have you forgotten the findings of my peer reviewed PhD thesis *"The Impossibility of Objectivity in Leftist Thought and Ideology"*? It has now been accepted into scientific canon and known in rarefied intellectual circles as "wayneL's Law".
> 
> _Ipso facto_, there is 0% probability that Cassidy feels any sort of embarrassment at all, or any recognition by a large proportion of ABC devotees of any academic impropriety on his part.






drsmith said:


> To get them to start reading it, you might need a more politically correct title.
> 
> *"The Challenge of Objectivity in Social Progressive Perception and Context"*




You guys ain't eating enough Wagyu.

Those two titles are so pre-modern, not even modern, never mind post modern.

The title should be

*The Hermeneutics of Teleological Transcendence in Ontological Discourse.*

I happen to be preparing a paper for the ABC board, for a fee of course, on just that topic.

gg


----------



## drsmith (17 October 2013)

Some interesting advice for Labor from the outgoing Bob Carr,



> "If you want to embrace the Greens/Left/Fairfax/*ABC* position, you are going to go backwards at the next election."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...l-abbotts-bluff/story-fnahw9xv-1226741250691#

Fairfax's response,



> Bob Carr is a dinosaur feeding the hungry beast of racism in this country. An ineffectual foreign minister who opened his mouth before taking proper counsel, he now seeks to fuel the obsession of the major Australian political parties with kicking already persecuted and downtrodden people.
> 
> Quoted as saying to Right faction colleagues in the ALP, ''if you want to embrace the Greens-Left-Fairfax-ABC position, you are going to go backwards at the next election'', Carr is reinforcing a position on asylum seekers that can't be allowed to persist in a country that aspires to call itself humane and compassionate.




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/com...k-at-how-europe-responded-20131016-2vmta.html

My bolds.


----------



## noco (17 October 2013)

I have posted this again because it emphasis the free run the ABC gives Labor on this sham of a CARBON TAX.

The ABC are always wardwood with truth on what is happening in other countries.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-climate-fiction/story-e6frg76f-1226741257158


----------



## drsmith (17 October 2013)

noco said:


> I have posted this again because it emphasis the free run the ABC gives Labor on this sham of a CARBON TAX.
> 
> The ABC are always wardwood with truth on what is happening in other countries.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-climate-fiction/story-e6frg76f-1226741257158



That article is behind a pay wall that can't be penetrated by deleting cookies.



> IT is natural that when Tony Abbott told Asia-Pacific leaders he was going to repeal Australia's carbon tax he found no opposition, and a good deal of support instead. He mentioned it in plenary sessions and bilateral meetings with all the leaders.
> 
> In taking this action, Abbott is bringing us into line with Asia-Pacific practice. There is not one significant national carbon tax or emissions trading scheme operating anywhere in the Asia-Pacific.




Andrew Bolt though has posted some of the detail within the above article,



> The ABC in particular runs a constant propaganda campaign in favour of the idea that the world is moving to put a price on carbon…
> 
> But here are some actual facts. The UN Framework Convention on Climate has 195 members. Only 34 of those use anything resembling an emissions trading scheme. Of those, 27 are in the EU scheme…
> 
> ...




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/were_on_our_own_with_this_crazy_carbon_tax/


----------



## Logique (17 October 2013)

NSW today has a bushfire emergency, with uncontrolled outbreaks around Sydney and the highlands.

Keeping communities informed during emergencies, it's something that the ABC outlets do really well.

They're not all bad.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 October 2013)

Logique said:


> NSW today has a bushfire emergency, with uncontrolled outbreaks around Sydney and the highlands.
> 
> Keeping communities informed during emergencies, it's something that the ABC outlets do really well.
> 
> They're not all bad.




I would agree, that local ABC are very very good.

An ABC reporter from Townsville ABC was the only ABC reporter to ask Rudd a question that he couldn't palm off, during the election. Paula Tapiolis had him stumped.

During Yasi, ABC Local Radio were the very best with information and reassurance.

ABC *Local* Radio is the very best.

ABC Radio National is full of Green and ALP Hangers On by and large.

The latter should go, the former enlarged and resourced better.

gg


----------



## IFocus (18 October 2013)

Logique said:


> NSW today has a bushfire emergency, with uncontrolled outbreaks around Sydney and the highlands.
> 
> Keeping communities informed during emergencies, it's something that the ABC outlets do really well.
> 
> They're not all bad.





Same here in WA bush-fires and cyclones the ABC do an excellent job.

Regardless of what others say I find the ABC tend to remain with the facts rather than trying to rev up a client base.


----------



## noco (18 October 2013)

noco said:


> I have posted this again because it emphasis the free run the ABC gives Labor on this sham of a CARBON TAX.
> 
> The ABC are always wardwood with truth on what is happening in other countries.
> 
> ...




?
IT is natural that when Tony Abbott told Asia-Pacific leaders he was going to repeal Australia's carbon tax he found no opposition, and a good deal of support instead. He mentioned it in plenary sessions and bilateral meetings with all the leaders. 
In taking this action, Abbott is bringing us into line with Asia-Pacific practice. There is not one significant national carbon tax or emissions trading scheme operating anywhere in the Asia-Pacific.

One of the most disagreeable defects of the Rudd and Gillard governments was the way they so often misrepresented reality, especially international reality. They tried to do this on such a scale that ultimately the public could see through it on many issues, especially boats and climate change. 

The politics of climate change the world over is full of rhetoric and devoid of action. If Australians are being asked to pay a tax, even if it's called an emissions trading scheme, they should compare what other countries are actually doing, not what some politician might once have said. 

The ABC in particular runs a constant propaganda campaign in favour of the idea that the world is moving to put a price on carbon. But the information is never specific. Any ABC interviewer with a speck of competence or professional standards should always ask the following: Name the specific scheme? Is it actually in operation? How much of the economy does it cover? What is the price of carbon? How much revenue does it raise?

You can impose no real cost on your economy, but still have a scheme to brag about if you have economy-wide coverage but a tiny price, or a big price but a tiny coverage. Either way you have a good headline scheme to fool the ABC with.

But here are some actual facts. The UN Framework Convention on Climate has 195 members. Only 34 of those use anything resembling an emissions trading scheme. Of those, 27 are in the EU scheme. No one in the Asia-Pacific has an effective scheme.

What about these Chinese schemes we hear so much about on the ABC? There are seven designated pilot projects in China. One - that's right, one - has begun operation. That is in Shenzhen. So far all the permits are given away for free. It has had no impact at all on carbon emissions. 

The Chinese government has indicated it may look at a national scheme for the five-year plan from 2016. This is at most speculative, and there are a million ways it could be completely ineffective, which is almost certainly the result. China is by far the world's biggest polluter. Its per capita emissions are now comparable with Europe's. It has some plans to reduce carbon intensity, that is, the amount of carbon per unit of production, but no plans to reduce the absolute size of its emissions.

Japan has effectively abandoned plans for an ETS. No economy-wide carbon tax or ETS is operating today. South Korea has a plan, but it will issue all permits for free in the first period and is looking to redesign its scheme partly to avoid the impact on electricity prices, which Australia's scheme had. New Zealand has a notional scheme, but the price is a meaningless $1 per tonne. 

The US has no carbon tax or ETS and is unlikely ever to have one. The separate Californian scheme is frequently adduced by pro-tax Australian partisans. But this scheme covers only 37 per cent of emissions, compared with the Australian tax that covered 60 per cent of our emissions. More importantly, in California, 90 per cent of permits for electricity are given for free.

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative covers several northern states in the US. But the price is $2.55 per tonne and it covers only electricity.

Canada does not have an ETS or a carbon tax. The Quebec scheme covers a minority of emissions and because the province is so reliant on hydro-electricity the scheme has little impact.

Some of the biggest carbon emitters in Asia - like Indonesia and India - not only do not have national carbon taxes or ETS schemes, they have massive fuel subsidies to make carbon-based fuels accessible to all their people. A fuel subsidy is the opposite of a carbon tax, it is a carbon subsidy.

The European scheme has a price of about $7. Famously, it covers a substantially smaller proportion of its emissions than our carbon tax did. Equally famously, in its first five years it tended to raise about $500 million a year whereas our carbon tax raised $9 billion a year. So all of Europe combined imposed a cost on itself of one-18th of the cost Australia imposed on itself. 

Europe also allows, within its scheme, a certain amount of imports of Certified Emission Reduction Units, basically UN-approved carbon credits created in Third World countries. The price for these shonky bits of paper has now fallen below $1 per tonne.

Labor's Mark Butler was yesterday repeating the ALP mantra, much recited, too, by the Greens and the ABC, that not a single reputable climate scientist or economist endorses direct action of the kind Abbott and his minister, Greg Hunt, propose. This is untrue. The vast majority of the governments of the world, certainly the US and Canada, are using direct action mechanisms to address greenhouse gas emissions.

 The rise of gas as an energy source has been the key driver of reductions in the US, but tighter automobile emissions standards and many other direct action measures have also been important. Australia would be extremely foolish to move substantially faster or further than most of the world. That is what we did in the biggest way with our hugely destructive carbon tax. 

To compare ourselves with the world we must be absolutely accurate about what the world is actually, really doing in its physical manifestation today, not what some EU bureaucrat or NGO activist is willing to say in an always unchallenging ABC interview. Even within Europe's compromised scheme there is a great deal of re-thinking as economic logic trumps climate change piety.

The carbon tax and the ETS are based on a complete misrepresentation of what other countries are doing. Australians have never voted for either an ETS or a carbon tax and, unless the world changes radically, are unlikely to do so in the future.


----------



## drsmith (18 October 2013)

Thanks Noco.


----------



## boofhead (18 October 2013)

Tonight on the evening news it reported based on the PBO that based on Labor's election figures the budget would be $9 million better. For the Coalition it is $7 billion better. I noticed none of the right learning ABC bashers has reported that yet.


----------



## Julia (18 October 2013)

boofhead said:


> Tonight on the evening news it reported based on the PBO that based on Labor's election figures the budget would be $9 million better. For the Coalition it is $7 billion better. I noticed none of the right learning ABC bashers has reported that yet.



Perhaps consider how accurate any of the previous government's predictions were.
Remember the surplus that was repeatedly announced, only to end in a hideous deficit?


----------



## noco (18 October 2013)

Julia said:


> Perhaps consider how accurate any of the previous government's predictions were.
> Remember the surplus that was repeatedly announced, only to end in a hideous deficit?





Yes Julia......500 times by Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan.


----------



## IFocus (19 October 2013)

Julia said:


> Perhaps consider how accurate any of the previous government's predictions were.
> Remember the surplus that was repeatedly announced, only to end in a hideous deficit?




He was talking about the ABC and its apparent bias?


----------



## boofhead (19 October 2013)

Indeed, I was talking about the ABC bias. Seems the anti-Labor people are a little consumed by Labor still.


----------



## Julia (19 October 2013)

boofhead said:


> Indeed, I was talking about the ABC bias. Seems the anti-Labor people are a little consumed by Labor still.



Not consumed, but yes, still fascinated by their self destructiveness.
And nowhere near as consumed as Labor are by themselves, viz just in the last few days,
hot on the heels of the rant from ex-speaker Anna Burke, blasting the factions,  the diatribes by Maxine McKew and Nicola Roxon.
Who wouldn't be entertained in a sense of morbid fascination!


----------



## Logique (22 October 2013)

http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/tony-abbott-privatise-the-abc-2#share

Petitioning Tony Abbott 
Tony Abbott: Privatise the ABC

Petition by: Michael O'Donnell
Caringbah South, Australia

"The ABC is blatantly disregarding it's charter for fair and balanced reporting and for a tax payer funded media outlet, this is totally out of line. The ABC has been infiltrated by journalists and commentators with clear political bias and does not reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population. For a privately funded media outlet, this is perfectly acceptable as the company lives and dies on it's profits but the ABC uses $1.18 billion of tax payer funds a year and I for one do not want my hard earned going towards funding such propaganda. It's time the ABC was made to stand on it's own to see whether this is the kind of programming that Australians want."


----------



## Chris45 (22 October 2013)

Logique said:


> Tony Abbott: Privatise the ABC



I would HATE to see the ABC privatised and it would probably turn me against the Coalition.

We should accept that it's a little biased to the left, take that into consideration when watching their documentaries and news, then sit back and enjoy the programs free of those mind numbing stupid ads.

The only reason I have a TV these days is because of the ABC and to a lesser extent SBS. Privatise the ABC and another perfectly good TV will be going to landfill!


----------



## Whiskers (22 October 2013)

Chris45 said:


> I would HATE to see the ABC privatised and it would probably turn me against the Coalition.



Yeah, I'm in agreement there Chris. The ABC should stay under public control.



> We should accept that it's a little biased to the left, take that into consideration when watching their documentaries and news, then sit back and enjoy the programs free of those mind numbing stupid ads.
> 
> The only reason I have a TV these days is because of the ABC and to a lesser extent SBS. Privatise the ABC and another perfectly good TV will be going to landfill!




I'm also a bit bemused at some of the hysteria about the bias of the ABC. It's as though some people have an extreme intolerance for a bias opposing their bias. 

*The best way to confront a bias is to reframe the conversation to focus on respect and fair treatment. That is an art some people possess and utilise well to make their point more strongly from a biased format, while those who don't just bitch about it.*

Despite the whining of bias to the left, there are a lot of programs biased to the right. Show me a commercial tv station with programs like landline and the rural quarter. There are also many other science and other documentaries etc that probably would not get broadcast on commercial tv.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 October 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Yeah, I'm in agreement there Chris. The ABC should stay under public control.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The political Left in the ABC are not just trying to reframe " the conversation " ( an elite new definition for debate ) , they are a propaganda arm for the Left, attempting to extinguish debate.

Nobody is whingeing about good quality programmes, just the incessant cant and bull**** from the cadres in the elites, who deem a top down left/green ethic for the Australian people is preferable to a genuine Australian voice.

gg


----------



## ChrisJH (22 October 2013)

Logique said:


> http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/tony-abbott-privatise-the-abc-2#share The ABC has been infiltrated by journalists and commentators with clear political bias and does not reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population.




What, I'm confused.

So, the ABC is biased towards the left - in fact,a 'propaganda arm' of the left attempting to 'extinguish conversation' according to GG - and the solution is to have it reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population - which would be... a right leaning bias, would it not? Would it not then become a propaganda arm of the right?


----------



## drsmith (22 October 2013)

Spring fires in NSW, the ABC and a historical context.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...op_bushfires_it_could_donate_half_its_budget/


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 October 2013)

ChrisJH said:


> What, I'm confused.
> 
> So, the ABC is biased towards the left - in fact,a 'propaganda arm' of the left attempting to 'extinguish conversation' according to GG - and the solution is to have it reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population - which would be... a right leaning bias, would it not? Would it not then become a propaganda arm of the right?




It's the top down crap that irritates the majority, spun by the elite left, in their inner city over priced former workers cottages and driving Range Rovers and Daihatsu Terios'

The general ABC Whinge bears no relationship to the aspirations of all classes in Society from Aspirational to Bogan.

It reflects a small inner-city elite.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 October 2013)

The 730report tonight is being blatantly political.

It is running 3 items.

The NSW Bushfires.

A Slur on the ADF, our Defence Forces, for allegedly causing one fire.

A free kick for one of the greatest Climate Alarmists, Al Gore, during maximum stress for communities affected by fire.

The ABC IS POLITICAL

gg


----------



## wayneL (24 October 2013)

ChrisJH said:


> What, I'm confused.
> 
> So, the ABC is biased towards the left - in fact,a 'propaganda arm' of the left attempting to 'extinguish conversation' according to GG - and the solution is to have it reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population - which would be... a right leaning bias, would it not? Would it not then become a propaganda arm of the right?




Non-sequitur. What is required from the ABC is balance, not propaganda... of any colour.


----------



## drsmith (24 October 2013)

Interesting piece from Michael Smith on the asylum seeker discussion,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...urate-and-misleading-misquote-no-apology.html


----------



## Logique (25 October 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The 730report tonight is being blatantly political.
> ...A Slur on the ADF, our Defence Forces, for allegedly causing one fire...
> gg



It is the practiced MO of the Left during bushfire emergencies to look for scapegoats - little kids, the utilities, the army, climate change.  Anything to distract attention from the real culprit - their duplicitous undermining of fuel reduction practices. 

In NSW it is a dual pronged strategy, they have infiltrated the bushfire bureaucracy as well, there are kms of green tape to wade through now.

ABC 7:30 Report had no trouble sinking the slipper into honest soldiers doing their job. Defence may have been responsible for the ignition of a fire, but they are not responsible for the subsequent rate of spread or intensity.


----------



## Logique (25 October 2013)

ChrisJH said:


> What, I'm confused.
> 
> So, the ABC is biased towards the left - in fact,a 'propaganda arm' of the left attempting to 'extinguish conversation' according to GG - and the solution is to have it reflect the opinion of the majority of the Australian population - which would be... a right leaning bias, would it not? Would it not then become a propaganda arm of the right?



50:50 would be fine by me, but we've seen 95:5 over an extended period. Employing a conservative or two would be a good start. And some researchers, the fact checking unit or whatever it's called, has under-performed, and made some presenters look pretty silly.


----------



## MrBurns (25 October 2013)

Get out the broom, long overdue - 



> Attorney-General George Brandis asks ABC's Barrie Cassidy to quit Old Parliament advisory council
> 
> ABC political commentator Barrie Cassidy has been asked to stand down from his chairman position on the Old Parliament House Advisory Council.
> 
> The request comes from Attorney-General George Brandis, while Prime Minister Tony Abbott earlier raised concerns about Labor appointing "friends to all sorts of positions" in the dying days of the Rudd government.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...-quit-old-parliament-advisory-council/5044882


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 October 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Get out the broom, long overdue -
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...-quit-old-parliament-advisory-council/5044882





Barrie's appointment is unusual to say the least, on the day or just before the writs were issued.

He needs to remember he runs a flagship, although be it very left biased ABC programme, which is paid for by taxpayers.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (25 October 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Barrie's appointment is unusual to say the least, on the day or just before the writs were issued.
> 
> He needs to remember he runs a flagship, although be it very left biased ABC programme, which is paid for by taxpayers.
> 
> gg




He's resigned the appointment.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 October 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Barrie's appointment is unusual to say the least, on the day or just before the writs were issued.
> 
> He needs to remember he runs a flagship, although be it very left biased ABC programme, which is paid for by taxpayers.
> 
> gg




I have just spoken to Barrie, and he has decided to step down from the Board position.

A good decision. It will save any stench from pervading matters.

gg


----------



## IFocus (25 October 2013)

drsmith said:


> Interesting piece from Michael Smith on the asylum seeker discussion,
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...urate-and-misleading-misquote-no-apology.html





Didn't Smith defend the wedding rorts?


----------



## drsmith (25 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> Didn't Smith defend the wedding rorts?



Unlike the ABC, Michael Smith is not funded by the taxpayer to the tune of a nine-figure sum.


----------



## IFocus (26 October 2013)

drsmith said:


> Unlike the ABC, Michael Smith is not funded by the taxpayer to the tune of a nine-figure sum.





Unlike the ABC Smith has zero credibility.


----------



## noco (26 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> Unlike the ABC Smith has zero credibility.





What credibility does the ABC have for FFS?

Needs a lot of ethnic cleansing starting from the top.


----------



## sails (26 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> Unlike the ABC Smith has zero credibility.





Lol... in your opinion only IF. 

Obviously you haven't seen the extensive documentation Smith provides on his website. 

So rather than discuss Smith's material you pathetically take a swipe at the man's credibility...


----------



## IFocus (26 October 2013)

This thread is the usual Liberal party partisan rant, lets pick a comparison "there is a budget emergency".

Was is Goebbels who said "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth" thats all I see day after day on these threads.

"The ABC is political" *what rubbish* they broadcast for the sake of the community rural and metropolitan.

They are there for the middle not the absolute extreme right that exists on these threads. 

They often cover the arts and culture aspects that exist in this country not the extreme right wing politics.

As for Michael Smith I repeat he has absolute zero credibility, none  what's so ever thats before he defended the wedding rorts of his mates, in Keatings words he is just a grub...........thats why he got fired remember.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> This thread is the usual Liberal party partisan rant, lets pick a comparison "there is a budget emergency".
> 
> Was is Goebbels who said "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth" thats all I see day after day on these threads.
> 
> ...




Oops iFocus, you have just invoked Godwins Law, and this argument according to protocol should cease. 



> Godwin’s Law is an internet adage that is derived from one of the earliest bits of Usenet wisdoms, which goes “if you mention Adolf Hitler or Nazis within a discussion thread, you’ve automatically ended whatever discussion you were taking part in.”
> 
> 
> Mike Godwin coined his observation as a “natural law of Usenet” in 1990. For more information about Godwin’s Law, check out Wikipedia.




gg


----------



## drsmith (26 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> Was is Goebbels who said "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth" thats all I see day after day on these threads.



What was that about a $70bn black hole in the Coalition's costings ?



IFocus said:


> As for Michael Smith I repeat he has absolute zero credibility, none  what's so ever thats before he defended the wedding rorts of his mates, in Keatings words he is just a grub...........thats why he got fired remember.



I was going to suggest you look in the mirror but you've long since cracked it.


----------



## sails (26 October 2013)

IFocus said:


> ...As for Michael Smith I repeat he has absolute zero credibility, none  what's so ever thats before he defended the wedding rorts of his mates, in Keatings words he is just a grub...........thats why he got fired remember.




Why keep up with the lie that Smith was fired?

Seems you never let the truth get in the way of your propaganda...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 October 2013)

sails said:


> Why keep up with the lie that Smith was fired?
> 
> Seems you never let the truth get in the way of your propaganda...




Michael Smith has been put up as a straw man in this argument.

Go to Gerard Henderson's Media Watch Dog for a good account of the mendacity of the ABC Royalty.

http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/media-watch-dog/

gg


----------



## drsmith (27 October 2013)

Insiders today is another Left wing love-in with Mark Kenny and Brian Toohey from Fairfax and David Marr from another planet.

The latter in the first 5 minutes declared the people smuggler's business model broken and promptly gave all the credit (you guessed it) to Kevin Rudd.

Interview guest is Christine Milne. 

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/


----------



## MrBurns (27 October 2013)

> Current Poll
> 
> Now that he is Prime Minister, should Tony Abbott continue to volunteer with the Rural Fire Service?
> 
> ...




This gives you a good idea of the ABC audience, no right thinking person would answer NO to this


----------



## MrBurns (27 October 2013)

MrBurns said:


> This gives you a good idea of the ABC audience, no right thinking person would answer NO to this




When I say "right thinking" I mean correct thinking not right wing.....


----------



## drsmith (29 October 2013)

Interesting editorial piece from that so-called rabid right wing rag The Australian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...o-outside-review/story-e6frg71x-1226748524672

I seem to recall earlier reports about Bob Carr making a comment of that nature about the ABC.


----------



## DocK (29 October 2013)

Tony Jones seemed to have abandoned even the pretense of impartiality during last night's Q&A.


----------



## MrBurns (29 October 2013)

DocK said:


> Tony Jones seemed to have abandoned even the pretense of impartiality during last night's Q&A.




Exactly he was downright rude to Pyne who took it in good humour but what a disgrace as a presenter Jones has turned out to be.


----------



## Aussiejeff (1 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Exactly he was downright rude to Pyne who took it in good humour but what a disgrace as a presenter Jones has turned out to be.




I expect Jones to show his true colours soon & put himself forward as a candidate in the next Labor leadership stoush.

"VOTE 1 - Tony Jones for PM".

I'm sure he quotes that to himself in the mirror every morning when he rises....


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 November 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> I expect Jones to show his true colours soon & put himself forward as a candidate in the next Labor leadership stoush.
> 
> "VOTE 1 - Tony Jones for PM".
> 
> I'm sure he quotes that to himself in the mirror every morning when he rises....




Does he only rise in the mirror?

He seems like a reasonable left wing chappie, does what he can for the cause, expects an AO in his eighties when the ALP next get in, probably gives $10 to Vinnies when they call, leaves his trolley back at Dan Murphys.

Sometimes I feel that ASF are very hard on Lefties.

gg


----------



## wayneL (1 November 2013)

DocK said:


> Tony Jones seemed to have abandoned even the pretense of impartiality during last night's Q&A.




Exactly when was there any pretense of impartiality? I never noticed it.


----------



## MrBurns (1 November 2013)

Aussiejeff said:


> I expect Jones to show his true colours soon & put himself forward as a candidate in the next Labor leadership stoush.




That wouldn't surprise me at all..............


----------



## noco (1 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> That wouldn't surprise me at all..............




I thought he was quiting the show and going on long service leave for 12 months.

You don't see him on ABC late line anymore.


----------



## MrBurns (1 November 2013)

noco said:


> I thought he was quiting the show and going on long service leave for 12 months.
> 
> You don't see him on ABC late line anymore.




Seems he just left Lateline for the year.


----------



## noco (1 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Seems he just left Lateline for the year.




I was hoping he would leave QandA as well. I can't stand the man.


----------



## drsmith (3 November 2013)

In stark contrast to last week, Insiders was much more balanced today.


----------



## MrBurns (3 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> In stark contrast to last week, Insiders was much more balanced today.




I noticed that too.


----------



## DocK (3 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I noticed that too.




I agree.  Maybe it's not just our leaders who are behaving like adults, to borrow from Bolt


----------



## IFocus (3 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> In stark contrast to last week, Insiders was much more balanced today.




I just shake my head when I see these comments


----------



## noco (3 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> In stark contrast to last week, Insiders was much more balanced today.




Cassidy may have been warned to pull his horns in or get them clipped.


----------



## drsmith (3 November 2013)

IFocus said:


> I just shake my head when I see these comments




That's at least not quiet as annoying as the usual squawk.



noco said:


> Cassidy may have been warned to pull his horns in or get them clipped.




The impression I was left with was that someone somewhere in the ABC had their feathers plucked.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (3 November 2013)

Much as I like Gerard Henderson, the Insider team use him as bait. The other panellists, presenter, comics and producers are so left wing.

There are good balanced commentators, Janet Albrechtsen and Nick Cater come to mind.

But, no, Insiders is a Political Left Show.

gg


----------



## drsmith (5 November 2013)

Bickering inside the camp ??

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ays-abc-health-specialist-20131104-2wx3n.html



Garpal Gumnut said:


> There are good balanced commentators, Janet Albrechtsen and Nick Cater come to mind.




IIRC, Janet was offered a political commentary role in the ABC and she declined the offer.

When one considers how rude the likes of David Marr are to Niki Savva, I can't say I blame her.


----------



## MrBurns (5 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> Bickering inside the camp ??
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ays-abc-health-specialist-20131104-2wx3n.html




That show was controversial, I think there's a lot of truth in it and I posted a link here to a forum where a guy has been saying all this for years.
How much chance has this got in the face of a billion dollar industry that relies on the sale of these drugs ?
Non.


----------



## Julia (5 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> That show was controversial, I think there's a lot of truth in it and I posted a link here to a forum where a guy has been saying all this for years.
> How much chance has this got in the face of a billion dollar industry that relies on the sale of these drugs ?
> Non.



I suggest you listen to Dr Norman Swan discussing the matter with
Professor Peter Clifton
Professor of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences
NHMRC Principal Research Fellow
University of South Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/

Two doctors, especially one with the qualifications and experience of the latter, are just a bit more likely to be able to accurately assess the value or otherwise of the Catalyst program than most people here, or some forum where "a guy" has been saying this for years.

You might also like to think about who, other than the pharmaceutical industry,  would come up with the billions that currently go into research.


----------



## Judd (5 November 2013)

Before anyone jumps onto medical claims made on a television program, it may be useful to see what else maybe available from these bodies:

Pubmed

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

and

Chochrane Collaboration

http://www.cochrane.org/

I understand that one of the USA doctors, and I forget which, who appeared on the program is also a non-believer in vaccinations.  That says it all for me.


----------



## MrBurns (5 November 2013)

Julia said:


> I suggest you listen to Dr Norman Swan discussing the matter with
> Professor Peter Clifton
> Professor of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences
> NHMRC Principal Research Fellow
> ...




The ABC has cred too and no vested interests such as the doctors.
The ABC wouldn't run with this for fun.


----------



## Julia (5 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The ABC has cred too and no vested interests such as the doctors.



Exactly what vested interest are you asserting either Dr Swan or Professor Clifton have?

Have you actually listened to the program to which I supplied a link?


----------



## MrBurns (5 November 2013)

Julia said:


> Exactly what vested interest are you asserting either Dr Swan or Professor Clifton have?
> 
> Have you actually listened to the program to which I supplied a link?




The good doctors have a lifetime reputation to protect.

I listened to a bit of it.


----------



## Julia (5 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The good doctors have a lifetime reputation to protect.



Certainly, and those reputations are going to be maintained  by the opinions of their peers, alongside - in Professor Clifton's case in particular - a considerable body of research and clinical experience 



> I listened to a bit of it.


----------



## Whiskers (6 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> That show was controversial, I think there's a lot of truth in it...




I tend to agree on both counts for the simple reason that the pharmaceutical industry has had so many 'lemons' over the years, promoted to the hilt as 'good' and 'safe' drugs only to be later shown up to be either poorly researched or deliberately skewed or fraudulent research tabled with it's registration supplication. 



> How much chance has this got in the face of a billion dollar industry that relies on the sale of these drugs ?
> Non.




I wouldn't be that negative. A little logic can go a long way, even in the face of sustained assault by vested interests. 



Julia said:


> I suggest you listen to Dr Norman Swan discussing the matter with
> Professor Peter Clifton
> Professor of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences
> NHMRC Principal Research Fellow
> ...




Logically... a Phd, any number of qualifications or 'titles' or amount of consensus doesn't in itself  "accurately assess" the value of anything. All it does is appeal to, or establish a consensus... which is often wrong when not backed by sound science. 



> You might also like to think about who, other than the pharmaceutical industry,  would come up with the billions that currently go into research.




The first point that needs to be realised here is humans survived and flourished for thousands of years without a pharmaceutical industry... on pure clean food, water and air. The quality of our environment and particularly the food we are served up in the last 40 or 50 years since the corporation of the world with it's lobby tentacles infesting most of our government and public safety authorities, has diminished to something well short of clean and pure. Just so much processed food that contains stuff that we are not told about. 

We've all heard about the adverse effects of added hormones and excess antibiotics in humans and also chicken, fish and to a lesser extent other livestock farming... overly promoted by big pharma for extra profit.

Even some fresh fruit and veg is adulterated with chemicals from big pharma just to force them to ripen a few days sooner and or colour up for presentation a bit better most often to the determent of nutrient quality and sometimes the alteration of the natural compounds to unnatural compounds in the fruit or veg.

The second point is less is often more. All other things being equal, less of this adulterated stuff we consume the more healthy we tend to be. Our body can only consume so much and perform so many chemical reactions before it wears out. Unless you have an irreversible condition, the best option is 'less is more' healthy.

It has been said that we are living longer these days, not because we are intrinsically more healthy, but because big pharma can prescribe more stuff for us to keep consuming to, not necessarily make us healthier, but just delay the progression of disease or our death. 

logically, one only has to look at the correlation of the obesity rate increase with the increased life span and increased rate of 'consumption' ( that key word for corporations) of processed foodstuffs and drugs to realise we are too often being force fed and brainwashed.

The third point is that the quality of the end product is not directly related to the amount of money put into research. The best end products are often the result of some specific industry or academic funded project.

Big pharma too often researches stuff just for the sake of the next big thing it can patent, try to find a use for it or multiple uses for it, employ high powered sales people who often would 'sell their mother for a quid' and convince the authorities we need it and proceed to convince us we need to consume it. 

There is plenty of arguably better research being done by other than the big pharma companies that make drugs like statins. 

Bottom line; the Catalyst program came with at least or more medical warnings and conditions in their comments than big pharma put on the drugs they push out... so what's the justification of the complaint!?  Certainly can't be based on free speech or equal time or resources for each side of the debate.


----------



## boofhead (6 November 2013)

A large part of the special was based on reanalysing the research that had a link between cholesterol and heart disease. A part of the information was excluded. It would be nice to see modern studies in to it all.


----------



## MrBurns (6 November 2013)

From the "guy" in another forum - 



> MEAT IS CANCER BRAH
> 
> I didn't want to bother with doing this, as I didn't think the latest scaremongering headlines would warrant much attention, but in the end it's stuff like this which is - not to put too fine a point on it - is actually dangerous. The retards vegans are going to be doling this "study" out for eons, along with the rest of their house-of-cards arguments.
> 
> ...




and this - 

http://highsteaks.com/forum/health-nutrition-and-science/cholesterol-52.msg1128.html#msg1128


----------



## MrBurns (6 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> From the "guy" in another forum -
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Here's a quote from a doctor on the same forum - 




> Doctors are experts in illness not health. I would be surprised if, in my 6 years of undergraduate study, and 4 years of postgraduate study, there was 20 hours TOTAL concerning nutrition beyond statements like 'eat less' and walk more. I don't ask my mechanic how to turn my Commodore into a Ferrari...I have to do that


----------



## Whiskers (6 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Here's a quote from a doctor on the same forum -




That's a very valid and pertinent point too Mr Burns... that permeated my reasoning above.

Mr Dr, while making certain mention of vitamins, minerals, fats, proteins and carbs etc in the context of medical issues, also qualifies himself by saying the consumption and balance of the foods for these things are more for a nutritionists judgement. He can see the adverse effect of the excess and deficiency of some of these nutritional issues and help treat that, but does not profess to know  all the intricate details of their qualities and effects as a nutritionist would. 

Essentially, a medical doctor is more trained to deal with 'crash repairs'. Nutritionists are trained more to deal with keeping us on the road of good health, preventing the crash. Having said that some doctors (esp GP's) do have extra curricular qualifications such as in psychology and diet for example.

The main point of the Catalyst program seemed to me, that the drug companies and probably too many Dr's are promoting the use of statins as an alternative to a good diet and lifestyle, an easy fix (cynically or ignorantly keeping more business in-house) instead of recommending or even referring to a nutritionist as part of a patient treatment program in certain cases. 

Call me cynical, again... but could it be that some of the doctors who are most sensitive about the program actually have a bit of a guilty conscience, knowing they have short changed those patients with a lazy quick fix instead of properly explaining and helping them, even referring them on to nutritional specialists to improve their diet if need be.

One thing is for sure though... the airing of the program was not political bias. Given it had the necessary medical warnings and more qualifications than most 'drug' products, and as previous posters also noted, raised legitimate questions about research and or data that is not publically available (although might be hidden in a big pharma file cabinet) that ought to be available for better informed use of these drugs.


----------



## MrBurns (6 November 2013)

Whiskers said:


> That's a very valid and pertinent point too Mr Burns... that permeated my reasoning above.
> 
> Mr Dr, while making certain mention of vitamins, minerals, fats, proteins and carbs etc in the context of medical issues, also qualifies himself by saying the consumption and balance of the foods for these things are more for a nutritionists judgement. He can see the adverse effect of the excess and deficiency of some of these nutritional issues and help treat that, but does not profess to know  all the intricate details of their qualities and effects as a nutritionist would.
> 
> ...




I agree there Whiskers, I think doctors are there to fix rather then prevent, their beliefs are entrenched very deeply and supported by the drug companies, there's so much money in the sale of medicines that I don't trust the drug companies one bit and they are at one with the medical profession.


----------



## drsmith (12 November 2013)

ABC now using Labor's lines in their headlines.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-12/new-mps-sworn-in-as-debt-cap-row-flares/5085344

The headline,



> Tony Abbott jeered, Speaker Bronwyn Bishop cheered as 'Hogwarts' Parliament gets underway.




Who was it that made the 'Hogwarts' connection ?



> Labor has protested against Mrs Bishop's intention to still attend party room meetings while in the Speaker's role.
> 
> Manager of Opposition Business Tony Burke said the elevation was "reminiscent of the Harry Potter novel" in which the villainous Dolores Umbridge is made headmistress of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
> 
> ...




And who was it that jeered Tony Abbott ?



> Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who nominated Mrs Bishop to the Speaker's chair, prompted the first jeer from Opposition benches by saying that "this chamber should always be a place of spirited debate, but it should never be a place where motives are impugned or characters assassinated".




Not exactly unbiased judgements.

The ABC should be a little more impartial with their headlines.


----------



## Ijustnewit (12 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> ABC now using Labor's lines in their headlines.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-12/new-mps-sworn-in-as-debt-cap-row-flares/5085344
> 
> ...




And their " Have your say " comments page is not any better. I tried to put through 2 pro Government comments on the story above and they never made it  The mods only pass anti Abbott posts and let the Lefties have free hit. It's about time these one eyed taxpayer supported leeches were shown the door.


----------



## drsmith (13 November 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> And their " Have your say " comments page is not any better. I tried to put through 2 pro Government comments on the story above and they never made it  The mods only pass anti Abbott posts and let the Lefties have free hit. It's about time these one eyed taxpayer supported leeches were shown the door.



Under Top Stories, the article is titled,



> 'Formidable' Bronwyn Bishop elected Speaker of 'Hogwarts' Parliament




Not exactly appropriate for a tax payer funded media organisation that is supposed to present unbiased information on the days events. 

Something along the lines of "Bronwyn Bishop elected Speaker of the 44th Parliament" would have been much more appropriate and leave the biased stuff to the private sector media organisations.


----------



## MrBurns (13 November 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> And their " Have your say " comments page is not any better. I tried to put through 2 pro Government comments on the story above and they never made it  The mods only pass anti Abbott posts and let the Lefties have free hit. It's about time these one eyed taxpayer supported leeches were shown the door.




I get most of my comments through these days, depends who the moderator is , I think there must be some radical morons in there that need to be routed out, my taxes should be spent more wisely.

- - - Updated - - -



drsmith said:


> Under Top Stories, the article is titled,
> 
> Not exactly appropriate for a tax payer funded media organisation that is supposed to present unbiased information on the days events.
> 
> Something along the lines of "Bronwyn Bishop elected Speaker of the 44th Parliament" would have been much more appropriate and leave the biased stuff to the private sector media organisations.




Disgraceful, but the upside is the worse they get the more likely they are to bring the axe down on themselves.


----------



## drsmith (16 November 2013)

If this was an exercise in panning for any gold that was left, it's perhaps time to give up on the river.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-...bits-of-foreign-minister-julie-bishop/5095094


----------



## MrBurns (18 November 2013)

Q&A what is it with this Indian episode ?
The only one I can think of is that one who cleared out the pensioners ATM account when they left their card in the machine.
They have a photo of him and his car that was parked in a disabled spot with a kid in the back.


----------



## MrBurns (18 November 2013)

ABC web site is an exercise in anti Abbott stories, not sure where this will end but something should be done.


----------



## MrBurns (18 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Q&A what is it with this Indian episode ?
> The only one I can think of is that one who cleared out the pensioners ATM account when they left their card in the machine.
> They have a photo of him and his car that was parked in a disabled spot with a kid in the back.




Now they're dancing,some of them in dresses are actually women.


----------



## drsmith (18 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> ABC web site is an exercise in anti Abbott stories, not sure where this will end but something should be done.



The ABC is poking the bear that is currently interested elsewhere but we can see how it's going to end.


----------



## Caveman (19 November 2013)

Quote Originally Posted by MrBurns View Post
ABC web site is an exercise in anti Abbott stories, not sure where this will end but something should be done.


drsmith said:


> The ABC is poking the bear that is currently interested elsewhere but we can see how it's going to end.




So the ABC is Biased but you still feel fit to link abc news in other threads to suit your agenda?


----------



## drsmith (19 November 2013)

My agenda ?

What's that exactly ?


----------



## Caveman (19 November 2013)

I`m saying that if you are using abc news links for your own arguments you cant find it that biased.
I dont think I really want to know what your agenda is.


----------



## drsmith (19 November 2013)

Caveman said:


> I dont think I really want to know what your agenda is.



You seem to be suggesting you already do. 

Just because a source of news and commentary is biased, it doesn't mean that news and commentary itself is completely without value.

The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.


----------



## Caveman (19 November 2013)

So you find the ABC Biased but good value as well,this thread is just a storm in a tea cup.


----------



## Logique (19 November 2013)

Over in the 'hate' media, is Bolt morphing into Keating, the classical music references are becoming a constant.

If he starts getting interested in antique clocks, becomed alarmed.

But I'm not a critic of the ABC Keating series, as some have been. It's must see television.


----------



## Julia (19 November 2013)

"7.30" this evening will have a segment on Clive Palmer.  The suggestion made by Leigh Sales when announcing this at the conclusion of last night's program was that some truths about Mr Palmer will be revealed.

Perhaps the ABC has belatedly decided to ask some real questions instead of being amused by him.


----------



## drsmith (19 November 2013)

Caveman said:


> So you find the ABC Biased but good value as well,this thread is just a storm in a tea cup.



Consider the following link from the ABC in relation to the number of boat arrivals under the Coalition government,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-25/log-of-boat-arrivals-and-other-asylum-seeker-incidents/5014496

It's updated weekly with the information from Operation Sovereign Borders and it obviously offers a useful up to date summary on the number of boats and arrivals.

Was there a similar link on the ABC's website on boat arrivals that was updated as regularly during the term of the previous government ?


----------



## noco (20 November 2013)

This is how our tax payers funds are feeding the pockets of left wing socialist presenters of the ABC and Tony Jones is the highest paid.

Are they really worth all that much?

Well. I guess the Labor would think so.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...nse-on-its-stars/story-e6frg996-1226763878649


----------



## MrBurns (20 November 2013)

noco said:


> This is how our tax payers funds are feeding the pockets of left wing socialist presenters of the ABC and Tony Jones is the highest paid.
> 
> Are they really worth all that much?
> 
> ...




Pretty good value for the ABC, politics aside, he is almost their entire drawcard for comment.
I bet that goose Stefanovic on Ch 9 gets triple that


----------



## Julia (20 November 2013)

noco said:


> This is how our tax payers funds are feeding the pockets of left wing socialist presenters of the ABC and Tony Jones is the highest paid.
> 
> Are they really worth all that much?



No idea, since the content of your link is unavailable to non-subscribers.


----------



## Whiskers (20 November 2013)

Maybe if all our tv stations were subscription only, the ABC might be the wealthiest of the lot if the presented perception of the amount of hate mail from people who think they are biased, but just can't resist watching, can't bring themselves to 'ignore' any and every little hint of perceived bias, is any indication. 

The ABC must be the most watched station by far! :


----------



## Calliope (20 November 2013)

The ABC has now openly declared war on the Abbott government. The release of the stolen Snowden state secrets was deliberately coordinated with The Guardian, to derail Abbotts hated program to stop the boats. The ABC was alarmed that Abbott was getting too cosy with Yudhoyono. Their efforts to sabotage Aust/Indo relations may very well succeed and take ages to mend. 

The irony of it all is that the taxpayer is picking up the bill to fund the ABC's campaign.



> WHY did The Guardian sit on its bombshell allegations about Australia spying on Indonesia for five months?
> 
> The timing of its joint story with the ABC on Monday could not be more damaging. It came at a crucial point in Australian-Indonesian relations, when the new Abbott government had achieved fresh co-operation on people smuggling, and was beginning to "stop the boats".
> 
> ...




http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...secrets-and-lies/story-fni0cwl5-1226763735908


----------



## drsmith (20 November 2013)

Calliope said:


> The ABC has now openly declared war on the Abbott government. The release of the stolen Snowden state secrets was deliberately coordinated with The Guardian, to derail Abbotts hated program to stop the boats. The ABC was alarmed that Abbott was getting too cosy with Yudhoyono. Their efforts to sabotage Aust/Indo relations may very well succeed and take ages to mend.
> 
> The irony of it all is that the taxpayer is picking up the bill to fund the ABC's campaign.
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...secrets-and-lies/story-fni0cwl5-1226763735908



Tony Abbott in Parliament today,



> 2:05pm: The first question time question is from Bill Shorten to the PM.
> 
> Please advise what progress has been made to restore the relationship with Indonesia since your parliamentary statement yesterday?
> 
> ...



I wonder how quick it will be before our national broadcaster takes note.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ics-live-november-20-2013-20131120-2xu38.html

My bolds.


----------



## noco (20 November 2013)

Julia said:


> No idea, since the content of your link is unavailable to non-subscribers.




Julia, there were hundreds of comments which I had to delete due to the fact that it would have taken up too much space.

THE ABC is paying eight broadcasters more than $250,000 a year, with Q&A and Lateline host Tony Jones leading the pack on an annual salary of more than $350,000. 
The Australian can reveal details of the pay packets of individual employees at the national broadcaster after obtaining internal payroll information for the past five years.

The ABC has been attempting to block release of pay information relating to its top-rating presenters for the past three years, fighting a Freedom of Information request lodged in 2010 by the Herald and Weekly Times, which is owned by News Corp Australia, publisher of The Australian.

The ABC received $1.03 billion of taxpayer funds last financial year, of which $465 million was spent on wages, superannuation and other entitlements.

The salary documents obtained by The Australian contain a breakdown of $453m spent in 2011-12 on 5511 employees. Jones is the public broadcaster's highest-paid presenter, earning $355,789 in basic pay last year, but he is yet to hit the pay level reached by former long-serving 7.30 Report host Kerry O'Brien, who earned $365,246 in 2009-10, according to the documents.

Top ABC salaries part 1

Top ABC salaries part 2

Only the organisation's managing director, Mark Scott, chief operating officer David Pendleton and then director of television Kim Dalton are listed as earning more than Jones.

Scott's basic pay is recorded in the documents at $678,940, but with bonuses it is listed in the ABC's latest annual report as $773,787. Pendleton is listed as earning $362,838, while Dalton, who was replaced by Richard Finlayson as director of television in April, was earning $359,238.



The 7.30 presenter Leigh Sales - credited for reinvigorating the flagship current affairs program following O'Brien's departure - is ranked eight journalists behind Jones, as the ABC's 18th-highest earner on $280,400 a year.

The documents show co-hosts on some programs are paid vastly different amounts. ABCTV Breakfast hosts Virginia Trioli earns $235,664 - about $84,000 more than co-host Michael Rowland on $151,006.

NSW weeknight news anchor Juanita Phillips is the broadcaster's second highest earning presenter on $316,454. Long-serving ABC journalist and presenter of Stateline in NSW, Quentin Dempster, is listed with an annual total salary of $291,505.

Former Media Watch presenter Jonathon Holmes, who had expressed opposition to the release of ABC salary information, was earning $187,380 as host of the weekly 15-minute program before he was replaced by Paul Barry in July. The program's executive producer, Lin Buckfield, is on $146,000.

The corporation's top-earning radio presenters are Sydney Drive's Richard Glover and Melbourne Mornings' Jon Faine, earning $290,000 and $285,249 respectively.

Former political editor Christopher Uhlmann is reported as earning $255,400 last year and Radio National's Breakfast host Fran Kelly is on $255,000. ABC's online political editor Annabel Crabb is on $217,426.

The documents reveal an erratic approach to the pay rates of the broadcaster's highest profile presenters, and is certain to lead to wage demands from employees as staff seek to redress perceived inequities. It may also spark wage claims at rival public broadcaster SBS as that station's presenters compare pay packets.

Today's revelation of the broadcaster's salary payments will also stoke rivalries across state borders, with equivalent positions in each state varying wildly. ABC News weeknight anchors in Adelaide and Perth earn less than a third of their Sydney counterparts. Adelaide-based anchor Jessica Harmsen is on $104,007 and Perth-based James McHale is on $102,166.

The data also reveals the ABC's large wage spend in NSW compared with the rest of the country. More than $214m of the $453m national wage bill is spent at Ultimo in inner Sydney.

The ABC has argued against releasing the salary information on the grounds that it is contrary to public interest and is connected to confidential programming material.

Mr Scott has previously argued that because the public broadcaster pays less than the commercial networks, revealing the salaries of its employees would make it more difficult to retain quality staff.

Former ABC managing director David Hill has said the broadcaster should adhere to the principle of transparency.


facebooktwitterlinkedingoogleredditemail160


----------



## Julia (20 November 2013)

Thank you, noco.  Much appreciate your trouble in posting the detail. 

 I'm not familiar with some of the personnel, but imo Leigh Sales is worth a lot more than Tony Jones just for starters.  She at least has some familiarity with the concept of objectivity in her interviewing.


----------



## noco (20 November 2013)

Julia said:


> Thank you, noco.  Much appreciate your trouble in posting the detail.
> 
> I'm not familiar with some of the personnel, but imo Leigh Sales is worth a lot more than Tony Jones just for starters.  She at least has some familiarity with the concept of objectivity in her interviewing.




I would liked to have posted the 100 + comments about the ABC but it would have taken up too much space.

I read through many of the comments and I can assure you they were not very synpathetic to the ABC. Many were horrified at the way their taxes had been spent.

Time for a damn good shake up in the ABC.....I can't believe they are still peddling such soclialist verbatim.


----------



## basilio (21 November 2013)

Fascinating to see how relatively little the ABC broadcasters are paid. I reckon they would be poached in a heartbeat by commercial stations at 2-3 times the salaries they are currently getting.  They are not big wages 

To my knowledge most of the presenters would not consider most commercial media because
1) They appreciate the integrity of presenting factual information without the  enforced spruiking of commercial media
2) They won't be leant on to follow the political interest of their bosses
3) They don't have to wait every morning with bated breath to see how the ratings for yesterdays program went and be judged for the "success" /"failure" of the ratings. (I read the autobiography of Mia Freedman. Good insight into the commercial media world and its mindless, ruthless approach to making money at any cost)

Obviously the commercial media want to destroy the ABC. While it and SBS exists it provides a commercial free alternative to their product. 

All in IMO of course.


----------



## noco (21 November 2013)

basilio said:


> Fascinating to see how relatively little the ABC broadcasters are paid. I reckon they would be poached in a heartbeat by commercial stations at 2-3 times the salaries they are currently getting.  They are not big wages
> 
> To my knowledge most of the presenters would not consider most commercial media because
> 1) They appreciate the integrity of presenting factual information without the  enforced spruiking of commercial media
> ...




No..... they are only leant on by the Green/Labor Party to push their propaganda.


----------



## noco (21 November 2013)

noco said:


> No..... they are only leant on by the Green/Labor Party to push their propaganda.





I have posted this link again on this thread simply because it applies to both.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...maging-australia/story-fnj45fvb-1226764657800


----------



## Knobby22 (21 November 2013)

noco said:


> I have posted this link again on this thread simply because it applies to both.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...maging-australia/story-fnj45fvb-1226764657800




And so the attack by News limited on the ABC continues. (yawn).


----------



## Julia (21 November 2013)

basilio said:


> 2) They won't be leant on to follow the political interest of their bosses



No, they won't, given their loyalties have already been established with membership of the Labor Party being a prerequisite to employment with the ABC, according to one of their presenters.

That aside, there are some wonderful programs across the ABC.  I like radio in particular and would hate to have to resort to the ghastly commercial stations.


----------



## trainspotter (21 November 2013)

basilio said:


> Obviously the commercial media want to destroy the ABC. While it and SBS exists it provides a commercial free alternative to their product.
> 
> All in IMO of course.




http://www.sbs.com.au/sales/ You might want to change your opinion then?

*Advertise with SBS*





Advertise on TV, Online, Radio, Magazine, Mobile


----------



## MrBurns (21 November 2013)

The ABC would never try to inflame tensions to hurt the Abbott Govt would they ???



> Liberal strategist sorry for Twitter rant against Indonesian politician
> 
> By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-21/liberal-strategist-sorry-for-twitter-rant/5107354


----------



## basilio (21 November 2013)

trainspotter said:


> http://www.sbs.com.au/sales/ You might want to change your opinion then?
> 
> *Advertise with SBS*
> 
> ...




True SBS does advertise. But I find watching their shows bearable because there are only a few ads in each break and I don't find the  program has been completely butchered.

I also find their ads a bit more intelligent.

But in the overall picture Murdoch is still intent on destroying the ABC/SBS as commercial competition for his interests. IMO


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The ABC would never try to inflame tensions to hurt the Abbott Govt would they ???
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-21/liberal-strategist-sorry-for-twitter-rant/5107354



It will be interesting to see if Jacqueline Maley's indiscretion from yesterday (Fairfax) makes next week's Media Watch.


----------



## MrBurns (21 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see if Jacqueline Maley's indiscretion from yesterday (Fairfax) makes next week's Media Watch.




She has form.............




> May 18, 2013
> 
> SMH's Jacqueline Maley spews venom
> 
> ...




http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2013/05/smhs-jacqueline-maley-spews-venom.html


----------



## basilio (21 November 2013)

Wow !! Jacqeiline Maley dislikes Alan Jones !!

Thank xxxxing heavens some else in this world  understands Alan is one of the most revolting. malevolent piece of merde that ever disgraced the airwaves of Australia . (and is paid millions to spew his hate bile over the wires).

Perhaps we should pass the hat around to support the fragile little Alan Jones?

_____________________________________________________________________
Oops . I forget Alan is poster boy in this forum isn't he ? An intellectual of towering knowledge and insight into the problems of Australian society which can only be cured by  sending back anyone of questionable ancestry or loyalty to where they came from. 

Rabbit on folks. The forum is all  yours ..._

__________________________________________________________________________

I read the  "form " of  Jacqueine Maley. Simply trying to defend Joe Hockey from a mad, rabid , reckless attack of Alan Jones.  Is this a guy you seriously want to defend ?


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2013)

basilio said:


> I read the  "form " of  Jacqueine Maley.




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ydney-morning-herald-is-sprung-bull****t.html

Note:

To access the above link, the four stars have to be replaced with a somewhat obvious word. The link won't post unedited I assume due to a swear word filter.


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2013)

Alexander Downer didn't direct criticism directly at the ABC last night in an interview on Lateline, but the message between the lines for our national broadcaster is telling.



> EMMA ALBERICI: So finally, Mr Downer, where does this leave Tony Abbott's turn the boats back or stop the boats policy, given it's so dependent on cooperation from the Indonesian military?
> 
> ALEXANDER DOWNER: Well, there's no doubt about it; it would be better if this hadn't happened. And I personally, as an Australian citizen - and that's all I am in this debate now - I deeply regret that this has happened. This has not been in Australia's interests and inevitably the Indonesians were going to react as they did and they've chosen an area which is of particular concern to Australia, people smuggling. But on the other hand, it has to be said, I know the Indonesians believe this people smuggling problem is a problem for them, not just a problem for Australia. It's a problem for us both. And time heals all things. And in time I think the relationship will get back on track. I do, I think this - *I can't predict how many months this will take, but I'm very confident the relationship will get back on track because national interest, both on Indonesia's side and on our side, demands that it should and our good friendship and our good relationship and the interests we share shouldn't be held hostage by the abominable behaviour of Edward Snowden, and frankly, the pretty irresponsible behaviour by a British left-wing newspaper, The Guardian.*




http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3895646.htm

My bolds.


----------



## MrBurns (21 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> Alexander Downer didn't direct criticism directly at the ABC last night in an interview on Lateline, but the message between the lines for our national broadcaster is telling.
> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3895646.htm
> 
> My bolds.




I never liked Downer but I was impressed with that interview.


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I never liked Downer but I was impressed with that interview.



Combine the between-the-lines message from Alexander Downer and comments by Tony Abbott in Parliament about regret for allegations in the media and one can visualise the axe being furiously sharpened.


----------



## MrBurns (21 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> Combine the between-the-lines message from Alexander Downer and comments by Tony Abbott in Parliament about regret for allegations in the media and one can visualise the axe being furiously sharpened.




We can only hope .


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> We can only hope.



It will come.



> On Tuesday, ABC managing director Mark Scott insisted the ABC was right to join the far-Left Guardian Australia in publishing secret intelligence stolen from the US National Security Agency by the American traitor Edward Snowden.
> 
> Scott said it was in the "public interest" to reveal Australia in 2009 monitored the phones of Indonesian leaders, even though he knew it would hurt his country.
> 
> "Yes, I appreciate that the release of some of this material might … cause some difficulties with the Australian-Indonesian relationship in the short term."




Meanwhile, Mark Scott on the ABC's payrolls.



> "Payroll information should be confidential. It shouldn't leak!"




The question that comes from all of this is what is the ABC there to represent, the national interest or its own interest from its particular perspective ?

At the very least, the culture within has to be changed and the only way to do that is from the top.

The axe will fall. It's only a question of time now.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...aging-australia/story-fni0ffxg-1226764657800#


----------



## wayneL (22 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ydney-morning-herald-is-sprung-bull****t.html
> 
> Note:
> 
> To access the above link, the four stars have to be replaced with a somewhat obvious word. The link won't post unedited I assume due to a swear word filter.




That's digraceful.

The left really has become a foul and cancerous malady in western society, a hideous counterfeit of what it claims to represent, apt to spew forth mendacious misrepresentations and gross perversions of the truth in an attempt to further its poisonous, misanthropic agenda.

Prime example is basilios appalling and petulant little rant above and the copious cesspool of verbal diarrhea from Whiskers, _inter alia_.


----------



## noco (22 November 2013)

wayneL said:


> That's digraceful.
> 
> The left really has become a foul and cancerous malady in western society, a hideous counterfeit of what it claims to represent, apt to spew forth mendacious misrepresentations and gross perversions of the truth in an attempt to further its poisonous, misanthropic agenda.
> 
> Prime example is basilios appalling and petulant little rant above and the copious cesspool of verbal diarrhea from Whiskers, _inter alia_.




Well done Wayne......I like it.


----------



## basilio (22 November 2013)

Interesting to see another view on the "huge" salaries paid to ABC presenters.




> *This is how many ABC journalists you can buy for one Kyle Sandilands.*
> Friday 22 November 2013 7:02am
> 
> 
> ...




http://www.mamamia.com.au/news/abc-salaries/

View attachment FACT.docx


----------



## wayneL (22 November 2013)

I guess if I owned a media outlet, I'd pay a hellava lot more for someone people like to listen to than a petty, transparent propagandist.


----------



## drsmith (22 November 2013)

wayneL said:


> That's digraceful.
> 
> The left really has become a foul and cancerous malady in western society, a hideous counterfeit of what it claims to represent, apt to spew forth mendacious misrepresentations and gross perversions of the truth in an attempt to further its poisonous, misanthropic agenda.



The ABC's latest effort in relation to Julia Gillard's comments on Spying.

1) Headline on the ABC's front web page;



> 'Promise not to do it again'
> ABC NEWS




Next to that is the image below.

2) Story headline;



> Tony Abbott should promise not to tap Indonesian president's phone in future, Julia Gillard says




3) First paragraph in bold font;



> Former Labor prime minister Julia Gillard says Tony Abbott should promise not to tap the phone of the Indonesian president in the future.




That in the absence of reading further very much leaves the impression it was Tony Abbott that did it in the first place.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-...an-accuses-abbott-of-mishandling-spyi/5109632


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 November 2013)

It is fairly simple.

Snowden is a traitor to the West.

The ABC has decided to adopt a traitorous attitude to Australia, due to a pervasive culture of political commitment to the Left. 

The kindest things one could say about the ABC is that they are stupid, not seeing the wood for the trees and that it has been a programmed attack on the Abbott Government .

At it's very worst, the consequences of the ABC's actions may lead to injury or death to members of our armed forces, diplomats or citizens.

The ABC should be held to account.

gg


----------



## Julia (22 November 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is fairly simple.
> 
> Snowden is a traitor to the West.
> 
> ...



100% agree.  Edward Snowden is not a whistleblower, as the ABC like to refer to him.  He's a criminal, and they are abetting his actions.  The damage done will be difficult to repair.


----------



## Whiskers (22 November 2013)

wayneL said:


> That's digraceful.
> 
> The left really has become a foul and cancerous malady in western society, a hideous counterfeit of what it claims to represent, apt to spew forth mendacious misrepresentations and gross perversions of the truth in an attempt to further its poisonous, misanthropic agenda.
> 
> Prime example is basilios appalling and petulant little rant above and the copious cesspool of verbal diarrhea from Whiskers, _inter alia_.




Hmmm, I like freedom of speech. It allows people to incriminate... themselves!



Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is fairly simple.
> 
> Snowden is a traitor to the West.
> 
> ...




That would be assuming that (the rest of the true story) which is sooo secret did not lead to injury or death to members of our armed forces, diplomats or citizens... already!

Think about the prejudice, fear and hysteria that led to the likes of the Vietnam war or the Iraq war... and others.

What if truth had prevailed?

On the anniversary of the death of JFK... what if he'd listened to all his advisors and their 'secret' intelligence and launched a pre-emptive strike against Russia/Cuba?  

*Secrets just make you more paranoid!*

But in any case, once someone decides to 'leak' information... why shoot the messenger, the abc or other? Do you shoot your postman when he brings a certified letter from, say someone you punched up because you didn't like what he said and is now suing you?


----------



## IFocus (22 November 2013)

Objective comments...........ABC reports the news ......its a commie extreme left wing anti Abbott plot, disgusting subversive propaganda.


Suggest changing your medication comments here are beyond the pail and some.


----------



## wayneL (22 November 2013)

I don't need the data, because wayneL's law has already entered scientific canon, but its just interesting witnessing it ivindicated over and over.


----------



## Julia (22 November 2013)

IFocus said:


> Objective comments...........ABC reports the news ......its a commie extreme left wing anti Abbott plot, disgusting subversive propaganda.



Are you actually suggesting the ABC and the Guardian have no responsibility in this matter?


----------



## IFocus (23 November 2013)

Julia said:


> Are you actually suggesting the ABC and the Guardian have no responsibility in this matter?





Are you actually suggesting they shouldn't report the news based on a political outcome?


----------



## MrBurns (23 November 2013)

IFocus said:


> Are you actually suggesting they shouldn't report the news based on a political outcome?




Are you actually suggesting that statement makes any sense ?


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2013)

Origin of the ABC's salary details leak identified.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-22/abc-salary-details-inadvertently-sent-to-mp/5111842


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2013)

A couple of interesting pieces on the ABC from Michael Smith and Andrew Bolt about the ABC's $233M contract to operate the Australia Network.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...take-the-money-then-dish-the-dirt-isnt-i.html

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...c-for-the-australia-network-per-annum-wi.html

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._jakarta_show_the_abc_breached_its_agreement/

The link to the AFR article referred to in Andrew Bolt's blog post is below.



> The ABC revealed that the Australian Signals Directorate had tapped into the mobile phone communications of Indonesia’s President, his wife, who is an influential political actor, and members of cabinet, among others.
> 
> The ABC also published six “top secret” directorate slides, “top secret” being the most sensitive defence classification, that disclosed the names of 10 different ASD intelligence targets inside the Indonesian government, the types of mobile handsets they used, that a voice conversation between Indonesia’s President and a Thai caller had been intercepted, and that ASD was able to map the president’s calls to various persons over a 15-day period.
> 
> ...




http://www.afr.com/p/blogs/christop...omised_public_interest_mTS4P4NusdEYYHrWX9GN8H


----------



## Julia (23 November 2013)

IFocus said:


> Are you actually suggesting they shouldn't report the news based on a political outcome?



I suppose it's futile to expect you to actually treat the question seriously.
The material was stolen.  The ABC should have considered all the obvious fall out before succumbing to sensationalism and making it public.

Simply being in possession of someone's private information does not confer the right to make it public.
Say I came into possession of some damaging information about you, (and obviously I'm not suggesting that that would happen) does that give me the right to post it here for all your co-members to see and to hugely embarrass you?  No, of course not.



drsmith said:


> Origin of the ABC's salary details leak identified.



Hah, that's so funny.
The self righteous ABC shot themselves in the foot.


----------



## Whiskers (23 November 2013)

Julia said:


> I suppose it's futile to expect you to actually treat the question seriously.
> *The material was stolen*.




Isn't the overriding point that the information in Snowdens file was originally stolen, obtained illegally, via spying? No government can win the ethical argument, claiming that someone who passed that information on further 'stole' the information, that the gov had previously stolen from someone else.  

Just because every country spies on each other does not make it 'legal'... it's just a gentleman's agreement not be put the info in the public domain in the first instance, to have 'diplomatic' officials bargain off against each other.

Then what about the prosecution for 'treason' argument?

Well, that too is a double edged sword for the government... apparently the gov (or at least some officials) could/should be tried for treason on their own people.



> The ABC should have considered all the obvious fall out before succumbing to sensationalism and making it public.




Didn't Snowden start leaking to The Guardian and The Washington Post while still employed by NSA, before it got too hot for him being exposed, and fled with the files? 

In all the circumstances, the ABC didn't 'make it public'. They just reported what is otherwise available on other news services? 



> Simply being in possession of someone's private information does not confer the right to make it public.
> Say I came into possession of some damaging information about you, (and obviously I'm not suggesting that that would happen) does that give me the right to post it here for all your co-members to see and to hugely embarrass you?  No, of course not.




That's true, BUT it was not the information about the person, the original data gathered about people that was the motive for Snowden releasing it, BUT rather the fact that US officials (and others) had such a massive surveillance operation collecting masses of information on anyone they chose in the guise of 'National Security'... WITHOUT reasonable accountability. 

If Snowden could so easily leak the information to the media, what if corporations or even other governments have leaks from the NSA, that are just quietly exploiting the info for commercial profit?

Think about the irony from the Murdock News of The World phone tapping of innocent people for sensationalist breaking news stories... money, extra profit for News Corp.  

Why are we seeing so much blame fired at the ABC for printing a story that was available elsewhere?

Maybe it has something to do with most of the other media is owned by Murdock's News Ltd and not able to afford being a hypocrite by breaking the news, in the still unfolding legacy of their own inexcusable phone tapping scandal.


----------



## Julia (23 November 2013)

> The specifics of whose phone was tapped and when may be new to Indonesia but the fact that Australia monitored its close friend’s activities will not be a surprise. Governments have been watching each other since before the telegraph. And they will continue to do so, because intelligence-gathering is fundamental to the maintenance of the modern state.
> 
> But is it legal for nations to spy on each other? And what protections are in place to ensure citizens, non-government organisations and corporations aren’t caught up in this web?
> 
> We should be wary of outrage over the reported activity of the Australian Signals Directorate and other agencies. Their collection of information about Indonesia’s leaders is legal. It may be diplomatically counter-productive or ethically problematical *but it is lawful*.




https://theconversation.com/i-spy-you-spy-we-all-spy-but-is-it-legal-20540 
Then, from the Financial Review:


> Christopher Joye in the Financial Review:
> Under the Officials Secrets section 79 of the Crimes Act a person can be imprisoned for up to seven years for communicating or retaining secret government information, particularly if it prejudices the Commonwealth’s security or defence, when they know it has been illegally supplied to them, when they have no right to retain it, and/or if they fail to take reasonable care to ensure that it is not publicly shared.


----------



## Whiskers (24 November 2013)

Julia said:


> https://theconversation.com/i-spy-you-spy-we-all-spy-but-is-it-legal-20540
> Then, from the Financial Review:




Just a few legal fine points to make.

The general collection of information and intelligence gathering is quite legal... BUT with caveats.

We have the right to collect information and intelligence... BUT we don't have the right to break other countries laws, or break our own laws such as to invade the privacy of our own citizens, to get it.

Say for example the Indo presidents, wife etc were taped from within Indonesia. That would be a crime by some Aus or US official working within our agency against Indonesian Law. That is why the collection of spying intelligence is quite often illegal.  

Further, in Law the 'intent' of the person (or government agency) is determinative of what if any crime has been committed.

A Crime for the disclosure of 'Official Secrets' under the Crimes Act Sec 79 is dependent on proving the intention of prejudicing the security or defence of the Commonwealth.

There are also exceptions and defences to 'leaking' government secrets under The Crimes Act, Officials Secrets, subsections 79(2) and (3), such as where there is a duty in the greater public interest to communicate the information to someone else such as the media. The government is constitutionally required to act in the public interest, not some private or political interest.

_ In Commonwealth v Fairfax [(1980) 147 CLR], the Court considered that the degree of embarrassment to Australia’s foreign relations that would flow from disclosure was not enough to justify protection of the information _​
_The public interest test set out in Commonwealth v Fairfax places the burden on governments to justify the maintenance of the confidentiality of the information. The reason for this is the importance of freedom of communication and public discussion. As McHugh J explained in Attorney‑General (UK) v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd: 
http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications...onfidentiality-and-loyalty-and-fidelity?print_​
So, why have the government not got an injunction to silence the ABC et all... because they know they can not get one under the law... the same laws they are bound by in terms of what they can collect in the name of national security.


----------



## basilio (24 November 2013)

Nice set of legal arguments arguments there Whiskers.

Trouble is I don't think we live in world where the Rule  of law is now taken seriously. When people throw the word treason around to describe the exposure of a vast international *illegal *surveillance network we have big trouble understanding  why there are laws in the first place.

They are there to give us some independent protection against a capricious government. Constitutional rights, 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech, Laws on Privacy. 

But it appears as if in 2013 a government just has to mouth the word national Security and all of this swept away.


----------



## Calliope (24 November 2013)

basilio said:


> But it appears as if in 2013 a government just has to mouth the word national Security and all of this swept away.



Any government would be very remiss in not giving national security a high priority. However in your case, along with the Greens, The ABC, and The Guardian and fuelled by Edward Snowden and Vladimir Putin, anything that can damage our security is fair game as long as it is directed at wrecking Tony Abbott's boats policies.


----------



## MrBurns (24 November 2013)

One of the lead stories on the ABC web site...



> Tony Abbott mishandling Indonesia spying fallout, says Plibersek
> 
> Labor deputy Tanya Plibersek has criticised the Prime Minister's handling of relations with Indonesia after the fallout from revelations of Australian spying.
> 
> *Speaking to the ABC's Insiders program*




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-24/abbott-mishandling-indonesia-crisis-plibersek/5113312

Insiders...... the Labor parties personal promotion programme sponsored by taxpayers dollars.


----------



## IFocus (24 November 2013)

Julia said:


> I suppose it's futile to expect you to actually treat the question seriously.
> The material was stolen.  The ABC should have considered all the obvious fall out before succumbing to sensationalism and making it public.
> 
> Simply being in possession of someone's private information does not confer the right to make it public.
> Say I came into possession of some damaging information about you, (and obviously I'm not suggesting that that would happen) does that give me the right to post it here for all your co-members to see and to hugely embarrass you?  No, of course not.





Understand your sentiment and I was surprised at how the ABC went about the story but in the end its still news. 

The end effect would have been the same whether it was the ABC or some other news organisation once the Guardian published it would have been in the public domain why they broke the story together was a bit different.


----------



## noco (24 November 2013)

MrBurns said:


> One of the lead stories on the ABC web site...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Cassidy has interviewd three Labor shadow ministers in the last three weeks.

What a grubby show the ABC Insiders are!!!!!!!

Abbott has got to start sacking from the top...I am not sure whether it is his perogative or some independant body..The ABC are the cause of so many problems for the Abbott government and it is certainly not in the National interest. The ABC have breached the National Security of Australia and they should be brought into line.


----------



## IFocus (24 November 2013)

noco said:


> Cassidy has interviewd three Labor shadow ministers in the last three weeks.
> 
> What a grubby show the ABC Insiders are!!!!!!!
> 
> Abbott has got to start sacking from the top...I am not sure whether it is his perogative or some independant body..The ABC are the cause of so many problems for the Abbott government and it is certainly not in the National interest. The ABC have breached the National Security of Australia and they should be brought into line.




Coalition wont do hard interviews particularly since its running secret agendas.

Shadow ministers are the only ones who will turn up Cassidy has been frustrated around this very subject before fact is the front bench on the Coalition side is pretty thin on talent a fact that will be reinforced for as long as Kelly O'Dwyer sits on the back bench thanks to the Liberal faceless men. 

Thought Cassidy gave Tanya a hard time not that it was a problem for her.


----------



## drsmith (24 November 2013)

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=23929&page=47&p=803809&viewfull=1#post803809



> _In Commonwealth v Fairfax [(1980) 147 CLR], the Court considered that the degree of embarrassment to Australia’s foreign relations that would flow from disclosure was not enough to justify protection of the information
> 
> 
> The public interest test set out in Commonwealth v Fairfax places the burden on governments to justify the maintenance of the confidentiality of the information. The reason for this is the importance of freedom of communication and public discussion. As McHugh J explained in Attorney‑General (UK) v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd:_
> http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/...fidelity?print.




Is the final paragraph of Christopher Joye's article in the AFR a reference to the above ? 



> The Financial Review has previously published details of classified intelligence, although only once a public interest test has been satisfied and it has been determined that these revelations do not compromise the security of the country. The ABC failed to meet these conditions.




http://www.afr.com/p/blogs/christop...omised_public_interest_mTS4P4NusdEYYHrWX9GN8H

Above link to AFR article posted again for reference.


----------



## Whiskers (24 November 2013)

Calliope said:


> Any *government* would be very remiss in not giving national security a high priority. However in your case, along with the Greens, The ABC, and The Guardian and fuelled by Edward Snowden and Vladimir Putin, anything that can damage our security is fair game as long as it is directed at *wrecking Tony Abbott's boats policies*.




Firstly, I'm sure the "government" is giving national security a high priority. BUT, the "government" (also termed Commonwealth or Federal Government) is the whole of parliament, the House of Representatives and Senate.

Secondly, There is a clear distinction between what is  'National Security' or 'National Interest' and the interests or policies of a political party. 

Thirdly, before any policy or executive government decision can claim to be a 'National Security' issue it must pass the 'Public Interest' test as well established under Law.. 

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...heet_20_-_The_Australian_system_of_government

I refer you back to earlier post (with correct position of the McHugh J reference) for distinction between government and political party and High Court rulings on what is in the 'public Interest', given that Government has to act in the PUBLIC INTEREST.

The general collection of information and intelligence gathering is quite legal... BUT with caveats.

We have the right to collect information and intelligence... BUT we don't have the right to break other countries laws, or break our own laws such as to invade the privacy of our own citizens, to get it.

Say for example the Indo presidents, wife etc were taped from within Indonesia. That would be a crime by some Aus or US official working within our agency against Indonesian Law. That is why the collection of spying intelligence is quite often illegal.  

Further, in Law the 'intent' of the person (or government agency) is determinative of what if any crime has been committed.

A Crime for the disclosure of 'Official Secrets' under the Crimes Act Sec 79 is dependent on proving the intention of prejudicing the security or defence of the Commonwealth.

There are also exceptions and defences to 'leaking' government secrets under The Crimes Act, Officials Secrets, subsections 79(2) and (3), such as where there is a duty in the greater public interest to communicate the information to someone else such as the media. The government is constitutionally required to act in the public interest, not some private or political interest, as  explained in Attorney‑General (UK) v Heinemann Publishers Australia Pty Ltd. 

_ In Commonwealth v Fairfax [(1980) 147 CLR], the Court considered that the degree of embarrassment to Australia’s foreign relations that would flow from disclosure was not enough to justify protection of the information _​
_The public interest test set out in Commonwealth v Fairfax places the burden on governments to justify the maintenance of the confidentiality of the information. The reason for this is the importance of freedom of communication and public discussion. http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications...onfidentiality-and-loyalty-and-fidelity?print_​
* So, why have the government not got an injunction to silence the ABC et all *... because they know they can not get one under the law... the same laws they are bound by in terms of what they can collect in the name of national security.​



MrBurns said:


> Insiders...... the Labor parties personal promotion programme sponsored by taxpayers dollars.





noco said:


> Cassidy has interviewd three Labor shadow ministers in the last three weeks.




While the proof of the pudding has yet to be fully revealed one can be excused for believing or having a healthy suspicion that the "Coalition wont do hard interviews particularly since its running secret agendas."

They only have themselves to blame for not fronting up to the media.



> The ABC are the cause of so many problems for the Abbott government and it is certainly not in the National interest.




See distinction between political and 'Public Interest' above.

If Abbott's (or any political leader) policies are not in the Public Interest first and foremost, it follows that it's pretty difficult to argue it's in the National interest.



> The ABC have breached the National Security of Australia and they should be brought into line




If they had, in fact and in Law breached National Security... why has no action been taken or even mooted to silence them?


----------



## drsmith (24 November 2013)

The current absence of sound from axe against grindstone being heard far and wide doesn't necessarily mean it's not being sharpened.


----------



## noco (24 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> The current absence of sound from axe against grindstone being heard far and wide doesn't necessarily mean it's not being sharpened.




+1 Doc.....I believe it is only a matter of time when Scott will be disciplined over his actions.

I just cannot see him escaping the consequences which may lead to his resignation.


----------



## Whiskers (24 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=23929&page=47&p=803809&viewfull=1#post803809
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Quite possibly... BUT the intent of Chris Joye is in the story.

He was clearly trying to beat up a story, hopefully trying to score a point against the ABC. He has that right in law, but in the court of public opinion, he should be careful not to pin his hopes on a 'lemon', an argument that will break down and leave a sour taste.

Note he has no evidence just suggesting, with a good dose of lemon fudge... that the ABC has broken the law.

Chris Joye 

Mark Scott is smoking dope if he thinks the Australian Broadcasting Corporation was acting in the “public interest” when it published the top secret details of Australian foreign intelligence operations,* possibly *in breach of section 79 of the Crimes Act, which covers “official secrets”.

And Mr Scott should be taken to task by the ABC’s board for making the scandalous claim, in defence of his own irresponsible decisions, that lawful communications intercepts programs, which we’ve been undertaking for 70 years, are comparable to corruption at the Australian Wheat Board and $290 million of kick-backs paid to Saddam Hussein’s regime in contravention of United Nations’ sanctions.

*Mr Scott must explain how it is in the Australian public’s interest for the ABC’s disclosure of the details *of sensitive yet conventional intelligence exercises to trigger a major crisis in our relations with our most important near neighbour, Indonesia.http://www.afr.com/p/blogs/christop...omised_public_interest_mTS4P4NusdEYYHrWX9GN8H​
Finally, neither Mr Scott nor the ABC has to explain how it's in the public interest... The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it is NOT in the public interest to publish the information.

*In our democracy we don't have to prove we didn't commit a crime whenever someone accuses us of something. On the contrary, the onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed.*

Also note the AWB scandal which occurred under Howard, who was one of a few PM's to front a Royal Commission, involved kick backs. That was a case of where the AFP considered it was not in the public interest to prosecute... or in other words risk exposing more dirty linen than they intended to prosecute.


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2013)

Janet Albrechtsen,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...nted-mark-scott-calls-for-his-resignatio.html


----------



## Whiskers (26 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> Janet Albrechtsen,
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...nted-mark-scott-calls-for-his-resignatio.html




Hey doc, you will really have to do better than relying on shock jocks and their equivalent in the press. 

Janet Albrechtsen has quite a history of misquoting other peoples work without checking the facts first... and not to mention her extreme right wing leanings.

Ironically though in the book _The Liberals and Power_, she is also quoted as saying the Liberals have become preoccupied with dominating the rational low ground, abandoning the high moral ground to the left. 

which brings us to her argument:

_The seriousness of the ABC's decision to publish *criminally obtained *information that involved such profoundly damaging and entirely foreseeable risks also raises questions about the ABC board._​
Refer to above post to easily dismiss any notion of criminality by the ABC.

But wait, there's more. Look what News Ltd has also revealed. 

Spying row centres on intelligence 'shared' with Jakarta 
by: Paul Maley and Joe Kelly From: The Australian November 26, 2013 12:00AM 

*INTELLIGENCE gathered by Australian spies operating from the embassy in Jakarta *, which is at the heart of the most serious diplomatic rift between the two countries in more than a decade, would have been shared with Indonesia once it had been "sanitised". Earlier this month, it emerged Australia had used its network of overseas embassies to conceal eavesdropping equipment capable of intercepting cellphone and radio traffic in host countries, including Indonesia. The country's top expert on signals intelligence, Des Ball, said it was his understanding that some of the* intelligence gathered as part of this US-led project, known as Stateroom*, would have been passed on to Indonesia, in what he said was a "major exception" to the protocol of never sharing information with a target country. - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...y-fn59nm2j-1226768262771#sthash.eTxESzo1.dpuf​
So News has exposed, as I suspected and mentioned from the start, that the spying was conducted out of the Aus embasy. That makes it ILLEGALY obtained by our spies, and this report also confirms my earlier estimation that it was likely US led from the Howard, Bush coalition of the willing war on terrorism era.

Quite likely that Rudd and Gillard were not aware it was going on... but Abbott did. This was his little secret weapon to get the inside info about smuggler activity and Indo politicians... but it backfired in his face.


----------



## wayneL (26 November 2013)

Interesting, if not fallacious intellectual contortionism there whiskers. Laughing Out Loud!


----------



## Whiskers (26 November 2013)

wayneL said:


> Interesting, if not fallacious intellectual contortionism there whiskers. Laughing Out Loud!




Well, we'll see who has the last laugh, eh!


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2013)

Whiskers said:


> Well, we'll see who has the last laugh, eh!



It won't be Kevin Rudd.


----------



## wayneL (26 November 2013)

Whiskers, in your world, you are always right, no matter what happens.


----------



## trainspotter (26 November 2013)

I think they call it "gaslighting" WayneL.


----------



## IFocus (26 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> Janet Albrechtsen,
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...nted-mark-scott-calls-for-his-resignatio.html




Unfortunately I read that shallow article, seems she has forgotten she is a self proclaimed proponent of Libertarianism.

Also on the board that hired Scott seems no sense of responsibility also.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 November 2013)

What makes the ABC Political in this case is, that the Guardian and the ABC have had this information on spying on SBY and his family for 5 months.

They chose to only release it when the Coalition were in power.

The sooner funding to this inner-city self-indulgent "progressive" broadcaster is closely audited, the better.

Sky News need to take up the Radio Australia Network, to properly support DFAT.

gg


----------



## noco (26 November 2013)

IFocus said:


> Coalition wont do hard interviews particularly since its running secret agendas.
> 
> Shadow ministers are the only ones who will turn up Cassidy has been frustrated around this very subject before fact is the front bench on the Coalition side is pretty thin on talent a fact that will be reinforced for as long as Kelly O'Dwyer sits on the back bench thanks to the Liberal faceless men.
> 
> Thought Cassidy gave Tanya a hard time not that it was a problem for her.




What would you expect when Cassidy is so socialist left wing Labor and biased?

You don't see those left wing shadow ministers fronting up to Andrew Bolt but they will always rush to accept Cassidys invitation.


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> What makes the ABC Political in this case is, that the Guardian and the ABC have had this information on spying on SBY and his family for 5 months.



I'm not sure that the ABC knew that much in advance, but then the ABC as the government funded national broadcaster should have never involved itself in its release in any case.

I wonder whether the Guardian approached Fairfax first. As a non-government media organisation with a left leaning bias, that strikes me as the most logical choice. Did Fairfax baulk and the Guardian then go to the ABC as a second choice ?


----------



## Julia (26 November 2013)

noco said:


> What would you expect when Cassidy is so socialist left wing Labor and biased?
> 
> You don't see those left wing shadow ministers fronting up to Andrew Bolt but they will always rush to accept Cassidys invitation.



Just wondering whom Andrew Bolt might have actually invited to appear on his show from the shadow ministry who refused?

There's certainly Left bias across various parts of the ABC but I think  Leigh Sales can be largely excepted from that, viz her questioning this evening of Bill Shorten on Labor's response to the spy debacle.  She did not spare him at all.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 November 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> What makes the ABC Political in this case is, that the Guardian and the ABC have had this information on spying on SBY and his family for 5 months.
> 
> They chose to only release it when the Coalition were in power.
> 
> ...






drsmith said:


> I'm not sure that the ABC knew that much in advance, but then the ABC as the government funded national broadcaster should have never involved itself in its release in any case.
> 
> I wonder whether the Guardian approached Fairfax first. As a non-government media organisation with a left leaning bias, that strikes me as the most logical choice. Did Fairfax baulk and the Guardian then go to the ABC as a second choice ?




There is no evidence that the Guardian approached Fairfax to publish the spy story.

In fact Fairfax and the Guardian are in a fight to extinction, battling to hold the left luvvie reader from the inner city "sophisticated" suburbs.

Only one can survive.

The ABC must have had a distinct failure of governance to broadcast the spy details, given that it makes them unsuitable to be in charge of the Radio Australia Network which should work with DFAT to progress Australia's interests overseas.

gg


----------



## AAA (26 November 2013)

Julia said:


> Just wondering whom Andrew Bolt might have actually invited to appear on his show from the shadow ministry who refused?
> 
> There's certainly Left bias across various parts of the ABC but I think  Leigh Sales can be largely excepted from that, viz her questioning this evening of Bill Shorten on Labor's response to the spy debacle.  She did not spare him at all.




What night was that. I'd like to see that. Abbott didn't dodge her even knowing he was in for a grilling.


----------



## banco (26 November 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> What makes the ABC Political in this case is, that the Guardian and the ABC have had this information on spying on SBY and his family for 5 months.
> 
> They chose to only release it when the Coalition were in power.
> 
> ...





The ABC certainly didn't have the documents for five months.  Unless you are saying that they have been in possession of Snowden's archive since he flipped (now that would be news!!!).


----------



## sails (26 November 2013)

banco said:


> The ABC certainly didn't have the documents for five months.  Unless you are saying that they have been in possession of Snowden's archive since he flipped (now that would be news!!!).




One question that should be asked - would the ABC have broadcast this sensitive information if Labor had won the election?  It seems more than coincidence that this was released just when Abbott was getting co-operation with Indonesia over Asylum seekers.

This is not a good look for the ABC, imo.

Oh and no need name calling - just discuss the topic.


And to Whiskers - I still have you on ignore.  Please don't reply to me directly.


----------



## banco (26 November 2013)

sails said:


> One question that should be asked - would the ABC have broadcast this sensitive information if Labor had won the election?  It seems more than coincidence that this was released just when Abbott was getting co-operation with Indonesia over Asylum seekers.
> 
> This is not a good look for the ABC, imo.
> 
> ...




The Guardian clearly determined the timing of publication.  Supposedly Snowden has handed over literally thousands of documents to the Guardian so would hardly be surprising if it took them awhile to go through them and that documents about Australia weren't a top priority for a British newspaper.


----------



## Whiskers (26 November 2013)

sails said:


> It seems more than coincidence that this was released just when Abbott was getting co-operation with Indonesia over Asylum seekers.




Did I miss something! At what point did Indonesia start cooperating with Abbotts asylum seeker policies?

Didn't Indonesia publicly state they would not cooperate with Abbotts asylum seeker policies... before the election?

This must be an example of two wrong statements make one right statement, somehow!


----------



## Tink (27 November 2013)

I heard that the Wotif co-founder, Graeme Wood, was the biggest donor for the Greens, backing The Guardian.
I am not sure if that is true.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 November 2013)

sails said:


> One question that should be asked - would the ABC have broadcast this sensitive information if Labor had won the election?  It seems more than coincidence that this was released just when Abbott was getting co-operation with Indonesia over Asylum seekers.
> 
> This is not a good look for the ABC, imo.




It is not a good look for the ABC, and if rational people ran the ABC, they would listen.

The ABC is attempting to become a third force in politics in Australia, in cahoots with the Greens and the inner city latte left of the ALP.

This is not finished. The ABC will harm Australia with further leaks, via an attack on the Abbott Government.

A sane, soon look at the ABC's funding is needed.

Save us all if the ABC run the Radio Australia Network. 

Senator Rhiannon and her leftie mates will be slavering at the opportunity to run Australia's foreign policy, via an unelected mob of vain and overpaid inner city vanities, "Our ABC".

gg


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2013)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Save us all if the ABC run the Radio Australia Network.
> 
> Senator Rhiannon and her leftie mates will be slavering at the opportunity to run Australia's foreign policy, via an unelected mob of vain and overpaid inner city vanities, "Our ABC".




They do now, thanks to Stephen Conroy.



> KATE Torney ("Criticism of ABC's spying scoop reeks of sour grapes", yesterday) exposes a central reason the ABC repeatedly failed to legitimately win the open tender to provide the international Australia Network on behalf of the Australian government: the ABC cannot accept that the Australia Network is not just another arm of the ABC.
> 
> The ABC's conflicted and inept handling of the Indonesian spying crisis has highlighted the folly of the extraordinary political intervention that handed the ABC the Australia Network contract against two findings of the tender board.
> 
> ...




- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...y-e6frgd0x-1226769045661#sthash.0MARR3P4.dpuf


----------



## Ijustnewit (28 November 2013)

Seems like the ABC is clearly on a path to have us at war with every Asian neighbour. They won't be happy till this happens  They are relentless in their daily attacks and beat ups and are on taxpayer funded media mission to see the Coalition Government fail at every turn. 

www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-27/china-rejects-australian-criticism-of-new-air-zone/5120920


----------



## Calliope (28 November 2013)

Ijustnewit said:


> Seems like the ABC is clearly on a path to have us at war with every Asian neighbour. They won't be happy till this happens  They are relentless in their daily attacks and beat ups and are on taxpayer funded media mission to see the Coalition Government fail at every turn.
> 
> www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-27/china-rejects-australian-criticism-of-new-air-zone/5120920




Mark Scott seems to have a pathological hatred of the Coalition. The worrying thing is that he is prepared to put Australian interests at risk in pursuing his vendetta.



> The Guardian itself says that less than 1 per cent of the Snowden material has been used so far. It is an open question whether the ABC will continue to play its devastatingly irresponsible role as the dedicated Australian broadcast network of the Snowden leaks and Guardian campaigns.
> 
> But the fact of more trouble from Snowden leaks is inescapable. No doubt they too will be timed to do maximum damage to Australia's interests. It's an open question how deeply the ABC wants to participate in damaging Australia.




- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...y-e6frg76f-1226769965260#sthash.i0dKMGKJ.dpuf


----------



## Julia (28 November 2013)

There's no point in linking to anything in "The Australian" for those of us who are not subscribers.
It used to be possible to copy and paste the headline into search engine but they now have the paywall covering that as well.


----------



## drsmith (28 November 2013)

Julia said:


> There's no point in linking to anything in "The Australian" for those of us who are not subscribers.
> It used to be possible to copy and paste the headline into search engine but they now have the paywall covering that as well.



The paywall can be partly penetrated by deleting cookies in the web browser. This resets the weekly article count of 5 back to zero and provides access primarily to direct news articles. Premium content such as the article above however cannot be accessed in this way. Andrew Bolt however sometimes publishes part of these articles on his blog.

Deleting cookies also resets the article count on the Fairfax press (SMH) back to zero as well. I think that's a monthly limit of 30.


----------



## Calliope (28 November 2013)

For anyone wishing to get the alternate view on politics to the ABC, SBS, the SMH, The Age, The Guardian, Getup  commercial TV, etc, The Australian is essential reading. The subscription is a mere pittance.


----------



## trainspotter (28 November 2013)

Journalists who have turned to politics:-

Maxine McKew (ALP NSW), Bob Debus (ALP NSW) Peter Andren (Ind NSW), Bob Carr (ALP premier NSW), Peter Collins (Lib leader, NSW), Brian Burke (ALP premier WA), Gary Hardgrave (Lib Qld MHR), Pru Goward (Lib NSW), Alan Carpenter (ALP premier WA), Clare Martin (ALP chief minister NT), Mary Delahunty (ALP Victoria), Jodi McKay (ALP NSW).

Anyone care to guess how many were employed at the ABC before throwing their hat into the political ring?


----------



## overhang (28 November 2013)

trainspotter said:


> Journalists who have turned to politics:-
> 
> Maxine McKew (ALP NSW), Bob Debus (ALP NSW) Peter Andren (Ind NSW), Bob Carr (ALP premier NSW), Peter Collins (Lib leader, NSW), Brian Burke (ALP premier WA), Gary Hardgrave (Lib Qld MHR), Pru Goward (Lib NSW), Alan Carpenter (ALP premier WA), Clare Martin (ALP chief minister NT), Mary Delahunty (ALP Victoria), Jodi McKay (ALP NSW).
> 
> Anyone care to guess how many were employed at the ABC before throwing their hat into the political ring?




I would say 15 whilst 13 went on to the coalition. http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/06/25/speaking-of-media-independence-how-does-aunty-fare/

I think the ABC has a left leaning but nowhere near as pronounced as a lot of you think.  I think if you read The Australian (which is a good paper) and believe its found the healthy medium to journalism regarding impartiality then you will naturally think the ABC is a Labor propaganda machine.  Sometimes their bias does get the better of me and I need to stop reading/watching/listening but this is predominantly from opinion pieces.  A lot of you don't help your case though when you keep smearing anything center or slightly left as commie socialists.  Balance is the key, if many of you had your ideal society then turmoil would unfold as it would if whiskers did (sorry whiskers).


----------



## trainspotter (28 November 2013)

Talking of the impartiality of the ABC here:-



> Significantly, according to an academic paper (From the Gallery to the Parliament: Journalists in the House of Representatives and the Senate, 1901-2007*) journalists have been over-represented in the federal parliament. There were 89 with 'backgrounds in journalism' between 1901 and 2008, averaging 7.32 per cent, a *"statistically significant figure and out of step with the number of journalists in the Australian workforce in both historical and contemporary terms".*
> 
> (Incidentally, the paper confirmed current concerns about MPs having little or no life experience outside paid political party staff work. Between 1991 and 2007 lawyers represented 8 per cent and business 9 per cent in the House of Representatives, but compared to previous periods 'all occupations had been superseded by the growth in party and union-related employment as the dominant pre-parliamentary occupation - 35 per cent of MHRs'.)




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-10-13/journalists-as-politicians/2296686

Whether we like it or not odious conclusions are being drawn by some that Australian journalists are inherently unprofessional and biased in favour of the Australian Labor Party.



> Errington and Miragliotta found that most of the journalists entering (federal) parliament 1901 to 2007 were *with the Labor Party*. This finding was said to have complemented other Australian studies which found that some 84 per cent of Australian journalists (John Henningham, Australian Journal of Political Science 1995) *considered their political leaning to be either 'left' or 'centre'*. Only a small number identified themselves as being on the 'right' of the political spectrum. 'Most journalists were unionised, with approximately 86 per cent belonging to the MEAA. If journalists gravitate to the party which most closely approximates their political ideology, then more will *seek preselection with the ALP* rather than the Liberal or National parties'.




Nup ... no bias here ...just calling it like it is.


----------



## overhang (28 November 2013)

trainspotter said:


> Talking of the impartiality of the ABC here:-
> 
> "Australian studies which found that some 84 per cent of Australian journalists (John Henningham, Australian Journal of Political Science 1995) considered their political leaning to be either 'left' or 'centre'"
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-10-13/journalists-as-politicians/2296686




What percent out of the 84% actually had a left leaning and what % were center, what a worthless stat.  Also what were the statistics of ABC employees as this is what we're discussing.


----------



## Julia (28 November 2013)

Calliope said:


> The subscription is a mere pittance.



Perhaps consider that some of us actually like the hard copy delivered, especially the large Weekend Australian.
I just don't get it every day of the week, and am not going to subscribe just for the occasional article I might miss on the days I don't see the whole paper.

Noco has recently taken the trouble to copy and paste the entire article to which he is referring which is much appreciated.  Hope this doesn't infringe any copyright?


----------



## Julia (28 November 2013)

overhang said:


> I think the ABC has a left leaning but nowhere near as pronounced as a lot of you think.



I'd find it hard to quantify overall.  There are particular radio and TV presenters whose bias is strong, and the content of their programs reflect this.  Others who are doing a good job of being fairly rigorous with both sides, eg Leigh Sales.   There's a great little program on Sunday evening on the Local Radio network - James O'Loughlin covers a huge variety of interesting topics with great guests, and there's not a political comment amongst any of it.  Also useful literary reviews and other non-political info on Radio National, and great music on Classic FM.



> I think if you read The Australian (which is a good paper) and believe its found the healthy medium to journalism regarding impartiality then you will naturally think the ABC is a Labor propaganda machine.



Yes, that's a realistic comment.  We all, whether we admit it or not, seek out sources of information which confirm our own bias.



> A lot of you don't help your case though when you keep smearing anything center or slightly left as commie socialists.  Balance is the key, if many of you had your ideal society then turmoil would unfold as it would if whiskers did (sorry whiskers).



Agree again.  There seem to be quite a large number of people who believe utterly in their 'side' regardless of what policy or performance that party engages in.  I just don't think that's realistic.  There are good ideas and levels of competence on both sides.  It's the whole exaggerated hyperbole from the die hards that leads to all the combativeness and angst on political threads.


----------



## trainspotter (28 November 2013)

overhang said:


> What percent out of the 84% actually had a left leaning and what % were center, what a worthless stat.  Also what were the statistics of ABC employees as this is what we're discussing.




Did you read my post? 



> Most journalists were *unionised*, with approximately 86 per cent belonging to the MEAA. If journalists gravitate to the party which most closely approximates their political ideology, *then more will seek preselection with the ALP* rather than the Liberal or National parties'.




ERGO 16% has a right bias  Conclude from that what you will 



> MORE than 40 per cent of ABC journalists who answered a survey question about their political attitudes are Greens supporters, four times the support the minor party enjoys in the wider population.
> 
> The journalism survey, the largest in 20 years, has found the profession is *overwhelmingly left-leaning,* with respondents from the ABC declaring double levels of support for the Greens compared with those from Fairfax Media and News Limited.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bc-survey-finds/story-fn59niix-1226647246897#

Oooerrrr ... ABC is Green and NOT Red?


----------



## overhang (28 November 2013)

trainspotter said:


> Did you read my post?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Maybe I'm just thick but I still don't get that.  It says 16% has a right bias but yet 84% percent are either center or left.... that means it could possibly be 68% are center and 16& to the left and we want our journalists to ideally be center.  Like Julia I cant read that pay wall either and I'm not interested in deleting my cookies as then I lose saved web site preferences etc.


----------



## trainspotter (28 November 2013)

overhang said:


> Maybe I'm just thick but I still don't get that.  It says 16% has a right bias but yet 84% percent are either center or left.... that means it could possibly be 68% are center and 16& to the left and we want our journalists to ideally be center.  Like Julia I cant read that pay wall either and I'm not interested in deleting my cookies as then I lose saved web site preferences etc.




Sorry overhang ... not sure what the copyright is by posting the article? But it does state thusly:-


The survey of 605 journalists from around Australia found that just more than *half described themselves as having left political views*, while only 13 per cent said they were right of centre.

_This tendency was most pronounced among the 34 ABC journalists who agreed to declare their voting intention, with 41 per cent of them saying they would vote for the Greens, 32 per cent declaring support for Labor and 14 per cent backing the Coalition._

So now I am thinking they are a pack of Greenies and not Commies


----------



## overhang (28 November 2013)

Julia said:


> I'd find it hard to quantify overall.  There are particular radio and TV presenters whose bias is strong, and the content of their programs reflect this.  Others who are doing a good job of being fairly rigorous with both sides, eg Leigh Sales.   There's a great little program on Sunday evening on the Local Radio network - James O'Loughlin covers a huge variety of interesting topics with great guests, and there's not a political comment amongst any of it.  Also useful literary reviews and other non-political info on Radio National, and great music on Classic FM.




I concur all though I don't listen to too much weekend radio these days.  I don't mind the ABC providing I can avoid Q&A.


----------



## overhang (28 November 2013)

trainspotter said:


> Sorry overhang ... not sure what the copyright is by posting the article? But it does state thusly:-
> 
> 
> The survey of 605 journalists from around Australia found that just more than *half described themselves as having left political views*, while only 13 per cent said they were right of centre.
> ...




That's ok, I imagine it may be breaching copyright by posting it.  I guess as long as those voting intentions don't affect their work judgement but that would be extremely difficult in that line of work. I now imagine the ABC carpark full of bikes and prii (Toyota Prius)


----------



## trainspotter (28 November 2013)

overhang said:


> That's ok, I imagine it may be breaching copyright by posting it.  I guess as long as those voting intentions don't affect their work judgement but that would be extremely difficult in that line of work. I now imagine the ABC carpark full of bikes and prii (Toyota Prius)








Another ABC journalist on his way to work perhaps or off to the school to hand out "How to vote cards"?


----------



## Calliope (28 November 2013)

Julia said:


> Noco has recently taken the trouble to copy and paste the entire article to which he is referring which is much appreciated.  Hope this doesn't infringe any copyright?




Yes I noticed that, but my preference is still for the link. It weeds out the freeloaders.

Back on topic, the ABC's Fact Check is a bit loose with the facts;  



> THE ABC's Fact Check unit has made a series of factual mistakes in its analysis of Clive Palmer's business interests, wealth and companies and relied on accounts that are almost 17 months out of date.



 See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...y-fnk76wj3-1226768206244#sthash.O3jD2Ps7.dpuf


----------



## noco (29 November 2013)

Calliope said:


> Yes I noticed that, but my preference is still for the link. It weeds out the freeloaders.
> 
> Back on topic, the ABC's Fact Check is a bit loose with the facts;
> 
> ...




Well Doc, this bloke "X" found the paper on the seat of the train on the way home from work....He then gave it to his neighbour "Y" who scanned the article and emailed it to "Z" who  posted it on the ASF. So I am sure in this case who would have infringed on the copy rights.

But you are right....post the link and keep out the free loaders......after all the subscription works out to the price of a cup of coffee per week.


----------



## drsmith (29 November 2013)

ABC headline in relation to the government's Graincorp decision.



> GrainCorp takeover rejection 'weak'
> ABC News.




That's Labor's response so perhaps the headline should read _"Opposition brands GrainCorp takeover rejection as weak"_ or even more appropriately, _"Government rejects GrainCorp takeover"_ as the story itself is about more than Labor's response.

Instead, the ABC with the above headline is presenting the Opposition's partisan judgement as an authoritative judgement in itself.


----------



## MrBurns (29 November 2013)

drsmith said:


> ABC headline in relation to the government's Graincorp decision.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes they're getting completely out of hand not sure how it will play out but it's got to end.


----------



## Calliope (1 December 2013)

The politicisation of the ABC is not news-worthy anymore. Even Abbott on Bolt this morning can't see anything wrong with their politics. He won't criticise them because he doesn't want them to up their their hate campaign. He also refused to criticise Shorten's other mouthpiece Ms Bryce.

On The Insiders they have completely dropped any pretense of being impartial. The deck was stacked 5 to Nil. No Outsiders i.e. not in the Canberra Press Gallery, were allowed to interfere with their hate campaign on their last show of the year. They had a ball. They ripped Abbott, Pyne and Hockey apart for the whole programme. It no coincidence that Wong wore her evil smirk on this show.

Abbott however, on the Bolt Report has no idea how to look like a winner even on a programme when he should at least show some confidence. I think that Gillard and the handbag brigade have completely emasculated him. He looks shellshocked. His style of leadership is to not upset anyone. He is a new age Neville Chamberlain. Appeasement is his style.

I never works.


----------



## DocK (1 December 2013)

Calliope said:


> The politicisation of the ABC is not news-worthy anymore. Even Abbott on Bolt this morning can't see anything wrong with their politics. He won't criticise them because he doesn't want them to up their their hate campaign. He also refused to criticise Shorten's other mouthpiece Ms Bryce.
> 
> On The Insiders they have completely dropped any pretense of being impartial. The deck was stacked 5 to Nil. No Outsiders i.e. not in the Canberra Press Gallery, were allowed to interfere with their hate campaign on their last show of the year. They had a ball. They ripped Abbott, Pyne and Hockey apart for the whole programme. It no coincidence that Wong wore her evil smirk on this show.
> 
> ...




My take is a little different.  Insiders was, as you say, completely anti-govt - but Cassidy did make the point that their guests have all been from the Opposition as the govt aren't putting anyone forward/accepting their invitations.  I also seem to recall at least one panelist speaking in favour of the way Abbott has handled the spying saga.  

On the other hand, Andrew Bolt was being soooo obsequious as to be almost nauseating, and I think Abbott was content to let Bolt get his point across for him, while allowing himself to appear gracious and dignified.  I certainly got the message when Abbott spoke of his doubt as to the wisdom the ABC showed in choosing to promote the Guardian's piece, and again when he said he would be foolish to pick a fight with the Gov General - he more or less said he disagreed with what she did and said, without actually coming right out and saying so.  To me, the gist of his message was clear, his presence on Bolt's show and his lack of disagreement with Bolt's gushing says all that needs to be said, and I'm sure most of the viewing audience would be in no doubt of his actual opinion on the matters discussed.  I'm thinking it was a pretty smart move - he got his point across without actually saying anything that could come back to bite him.  Costello on the other hand had nothing to lose and was most forthright on his opinion of the ABC and its chairman. 

I do agree that he needs to get a little dirtier and take the fight to the opposition.  Dignified silence is all well and good, but the media is being overrun with Labor shadow ministers giving interviews at any opportunity, and the average voter is likely to believe whatever they hear trumpeted most often.  Abbott may like to stick with the "we'll be silent unless we have something to say" mantra, but he's faced with an opposition that seems to have an endless appetite for the media, and a media that has come to expect and rely upon constant sound bites from politicians, and seems intent on increasing its own influence and power in the political arena.


----------



## Calliope (2 December 2013)

DocK said:


> I'm sure most of the viewing audience would be in no doubt of his actual opinion on the matters discussed.  I'm thinking it was a pretty smart move - he got his point across without actually saying anything that could come back to bite him.




It's the saying nothing to upset anyone that is biting him. It is seen as a weakness.


----------



## drsmith (2 December 2013)

Is this the briefest fact check ever produced ?



> Tony Abbott and Greg Hunt say axing the carbon price will save households an average of $550 next financial year. ABC Fact Check finds that claim in the ballpark.




That's the detail below the headline. Just those two sentences.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...-hunt-in-the-ballpark-on-24550-saving/5029570


----------



## Calliope (3 December 2013)

The odd couple.



> SOME have gone so far as to describe the connection between ABC managing director Mark Scott and The Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger as a bromance.
> 
> Certainly the pair are publicly and privately praiseworthy of each other. They met up the week before their organisations jointly published the revelation that Australian security services had monitored the mobile phone activity of Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, his wife and senior officials in 2009.
> 
> As the fallout from the story continues to be felt, it begs the question: would the unique and controversial journalistic alliance between the ABC and the Guardian Australia have occurred without such warm relations between the two executives?




- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...y-fn59niix-1226773788813#sthash.Yz6hOAb9.dpuf



Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger and ABC managing director Mark Scott catch up when they are in each other's country


----------



## trainspotter (3 December 2013)

No intention to change the operational style of the ABC .., Pfffffffffftttttttttt yeah rightio Tones !



> "My intention is to speak plainly and candidly with the Australian people in the hope that ABC management will see sense," he said.
> 
> *"Why should the ABC be acting as an advertising agent for a left-wing British newspaper?"*




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-...has-no-plans-to-change-abc-operations/5132074

"I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries." (apologies to all the Montys out there)


----------



## noco (3 December 2013)

drsmith said:


> Is this the briefest fact check ever produced ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Doc, I would say Malcolm Turbull has already tapped the ABC on the shoulder and asked them to check out there charter.

I would say it has been a subtle warning.....if the ABC don't heed that warning, then there could be some fire works from Turnbull....I can't see Abbott taking any action.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ons-oldfashioned/story-fn59niix-1226774150212


----------



## drsmith (3 December 2013)

noco said:


> Doc, I would say Malcolm Turbull has already tapped the ABC on the shoulder and asked them to check out there charter.
> 
> I would say it has been a subtle warning.....if the ABC don't heed that warning, then there could be some fire works from Turnbull....I can't see Abbott taking any action.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ons-oldfashioned/story-fn59niix-1226774150212



Not action as such, but public slaps at least from Malcolm Turnbull and the PM.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...over-phonetapping-stories-20131203-2ymrw.html

http://media.smh.com.au/news/national-news/tony-abbott-attacks-abc-4976896.html

TA in the above video link refers to the ABC's charter.


----------



## banco (3 December 2013)

LOL at Turnbull doing anything substantive to the ABC.  He'd never eat lunch in Mosman again.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 December 2013)

My contacts in the UK tell me that the UK Government is considering charges against the Editor and Staff of the Guardian newspaper, for aiding terrorists, harming UK security and exposing UK assets to harm.

Perhaps we should consider the same against the ABC and the ABC staff responsible for amplifying the Snowden leaks.

gg


----------



## drsmith (5 December 2013)

Julia said:


> Perhaps consider that some of us actually like the hard copy delivered, especially the large Weekend Australian.
> I just don't get it every day of the week, and am not going to subscribe just for the occasional article I might miss on the days I don't see the whole paper.
> 
> Noco has recently taken the trouble to copy and paste the entire article to which he is referring which is much appreciated.  Hope this doesn't infringe any copyright?



One example where an article is not quiet as premium as we have been advised,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-lanka-reverses/story-fn9hm1gu-1226775480556#

Andrew Bolt has more of it on his blog, but with his usual snips,

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...sri_lankan_boat_people_sent_back_than_arrive/

This looks like where it was lifted from,

http://colombogazette.com/2013/12/04/decline-in-lankan-boat-people/


----------



## drsmith (5 December 2013)

It would be good if the ABC could get the detail right.



> LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER:The move follows the failure of the Government's bid earlier this week to reintroduce temporary protection visas, which give would-be refugees short-term protection without granting them asylum. That was blocked by Labor and the Greens.



The government was successful in reintroducing TPV's. They were then subsequently disallowed by the Labor/Green majority in the Senate.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3905215.htm


----------



## drsmith (10 December 2013)

Another fact check from the ABC, this time on Scott Morrison's claim that boat arrivals since the commencement of OSB has declined 80% when compared to Kevin Rudd's PNG solution.

Story headline on the ABC's front page,



> Boat numbers don't add up




The above is a bare faced lie. The story headline though is truer though to the crux of the article's point,



> Immigration Minister Scott Morrison not telling the full story on asylum seeker arrivals




As for the full story, we all know who re-established the problem in the first place and the context in which the same PM established his PNG solution.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-...ing-full-story-asylum-seeker-arrivals/5119380


----------



## drsmith (13 December 2013)

An interesting insight on Tony Delroy's Nightlife show this evening (first hour).

The essential point was that if you listen (or read) to something enough times, you'll be inclined to believe it regardless of the quality of the source.

On ABC radio, I heard how much extra the Coalition's NBN plan was now estimated to cost on the 6pm news, PM and the 7pm news. No mention though of the dollar figure on how much extra Labor's FTTP version will cost in any of the above.


----------



## sptrawler (13 December 2013)

drsmith said:


> An interesting insight on Tony Delroy's Nightlife show this evening (first hour).
> 
> The essential point was that if you listen (or read) to something enough times, you'll be inclined to believe it regardless of the quality of the source.
> 
> On ABC radio, I heard how much extra the Coalition's NBN plan was now estimated to cost on the 6pm news, PM and the 7pm news. No mention though of the dollar figure on how much extra Labor's FTTP version will cost in any of the above.



Yes most comentary today hasn't mentioned the cost of FTTP. Weird


----------



## IFocus (13 December 2013)

I always like to read through the comments after the opinion articles.

ABC comments are extended researched, factual and informative. Discussions tend to be civil except for the odd troll.

Liberal Daily News comments are in the main with little exception are angry rhetorical rants with no factual base and really quite boring. 

Just an observation.

Of course if I want the facts I always check with the ABC.


----------



## sails (13 December 2013)

IFocus said:


> I always like to read through the comments after the opinion articles.
> 
> ABC comments are extended researched, factual and informative. Discussions tend to be civil except for the odd troll.
> 
> ...




IFocus, when something agrees with your political bias you are likely to see it as fact.  If the ABC were as biased to the coalition as they are to labor/greens, you would not be happy.  

  Can you accept that so many people see the political bias of the ABC to the left as blatantly obvious.  Just because it confirms your own bias doesn't mean there is none.

If Abbott were the centre of something like the AWU scandal, I think there is a high possibility that the ABC would have broadcast the court case on Monday several times a day and still be going.  But next to nothing on this from the ABC.

Prior to the election, the ABC had practically nothing on the 50,000+ boat arrivals.  Since the coalition got in they now keep a tally and don't they broadcast every arrival several times if just one boat arrives?

How can you possibly say there is no bias?  That's just two examples.  There have been many more like Insiders where it has been reported there might be one guest from the coalition against the rest from labor/greens.  

ABC has many good shows that are not political and it would be a shame to see them go, but something needs to be done about the clear political agenda that seems to be coming from the ABC which is paid for by ALL Australians.  It should represent ALL Australians.  For example, they should have been reporting ALL boat arrivals for the last six years and not just started now.  Where is the consistency for ALL Australians?


----------



## overhang (13 December 2013)

sails said:


> Prior to the election, the ABC had practically nothing on the 50,000+ boat arrivals.  Since the coalition got in they now keep a tally and don't they broadcast every arrival several times if just one boat arrives?




Funny how our own bias can give us selective memory, I clearly remember the ABC broadcasting almost daily the that a new boat arrived under the last government.  This was on the hourly news bulletins.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 December 2013)

The ABC pitches to the New Class, an upper middle educated class, and it's programming reflects this.

It has a public service attitude, evidenced by the absence of it's star leftie shows, QA, Insiders and Media Watch, from the airwaves for three months over summer, even when parliament is sitting.

Most working Australians avoid it's elitist shows.

If the ABC showed more programmes that would attract the ordinary workers and their families, I would be in favour of saving it.

It is so inward looking that this year it has disappeared up it's own fundament.

The final insult was the amplification of Snowden's treachery via our 8c a day.

I would not care one whit were it disbanded, although the rural and regional stations should be kept, as they are a sea of sanity in a metropolitan sewer.

Perhaps a complete withdrawl of funds from Sydney and Melbourne, with a reorg, would be the way to go.

gg


----------



## basilio (13 December 2013)

It's a real problem the ABC isn't it ?  It offers intelligent programs on Science, Arts, History, the Environment, childrens shows. The drama and comedy from the BBC are excellent

It doesn't (generally) have a host of vapid, ridiculously overhyped dancing/cooking/reality programs.

In the current affairs area it is one of the very few stations that will challenge  politicians from all parties who try to  offer up  half/complete untruths. 

The producers  doesn't have to keep an eye on owners who want their particular projects supported or at least not attacked. And it doesn't have to be wary of offending big advertisers who would pull out their money if the wrong stories are covered.

And finally I don't have to put up with myriads of mind numbing ads that destroy any semblance of continuity in programs and turn the brain into mush.

Go figure..


----------



## trainspotter (13 December 2013)

basilio said:


> It's a real problem the ABC isn't it ?  It offers intelligent programs on Science, Arts, History, the Environment, childrens shows. The drama and comedy from the BBC are excellent
> 
> It doesn't (generally) have a host of vapid, ridiculously overhyped dancing/cooking/reality programs.
> 
> ...




+1 ..... now if we could only get them to stop navel gazing.



> *THE ABC will undertake a series of sweeping reviews of its content after chairman Jim Spigelman conceded the public broadcaster needed to address allegations of bias and rebalance the airtime it gave to left-wing issues such as gay marriage, to focus more on mainstream concerns such as electricity pricing.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...gations-of-bias/story-fna045gd-1226781045768#


----------



## Chris45 (13 December 2013)

Has the ABC been taken over by feminists as well as leftists?

The Brisbane 7pm news used to be read by David Curnow who was an excellent presenter with a very enjoyable style. Nine months ago he was mysteriously dumped and replaced by Karina Carvalho. So Queensland news, weather and current affairs are now dominated by feminists.

Dress standards have declined significantly and not only on the ABC. While the few remaining male presenters always appear in suits and ties, most of the females, Leigh Sales for example, frequently appear with casual low cut tops exposing their cleavages. If I want pr0n there are plenty of internet sites I can visit, I don't want to be confronted by it while watching the news.


----------



## IFocus (13 December 2013)

sails said:


> IFocus, when something agrees with your political bias you are likely to see it as fact.  If the ABC were as biased to the coalition as they are to labor/greens, you would not be happy.
> 
> Can you accept that so many people see the political bias of the ABC to the left as blatantly obvious.  Just because it confirms your own bias doesn't mean there is none.
> 
> ...





The political middle ground is not screaming bias against the ABC but certainly those with vested interests and political agendas do.

Quite frankly the ABC broadcasts to community's at large which the right wing is never involved in other than to strip money off so I guess its always going to be called left wing as there is a certain social conciousness about its programming some thing that will never exist under a Coalition government or from its supporters.(not trying to include at you of course)  

Peter Reith regularly writes on the ABC opinion section (has become the mouth piece for things the government cannot say publicly) for good reason so he can at least claim some sort of credibility.

Like I said before for intelligence the comments on the ABC website just leave the Liberal Daily News publications for dead and the ABC get their facts right.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 December 2013)

Our diggers in Afghanistan not only have to deal with the Taliban and Islamic nutters, but now have to deal with the ABC, trying to slur our soldiers over the death of an enemy combatant as a death in custody.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-13/hurley-may-have-misled-senate-on-27combat-related-death27-in-/5156524

This carry on by the ABC, would have made it impossible for us to defeat the Japanese and Nazi's during WW2, had our ADF personnel had to keep the un-Australian ABC from their shoulders in every action they were in.

Shame on the ABC for spinning a story for what it is not.

Pillocks.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (13 December 2013)

IFocus said:


> Quite frankly the ABC broadcasts to community's at large which the right wing is never involved in other than to strip money off so I guess its always going to be called left wing as there is a certain social conciousness about its programming some thing that will never exist under a Coalition government or from its supporters.(not trying to include at you of course)




So how many of your rentals do you lease out to the needy ?
A bit catty, but I hate chardonay socialists.


----------



## IFocus (14 December 2013)

sptrawler said:


> So how many of your rentals do you lease out to the needy ?
> A bit catty, but I hate chardonay socialists.




Not so catty but certainly nasty, personal and really unnecessary but I do speak from experience you should get out more. 

The rentals I own are actually the cheapest in the area they are very clean and comfortable (I would live in them) with some long term tenants and often taken by people waiting for state housing.

We could do them up and double the rents and will one day to fund retirement income but currently have a long term resident who is losing limbs due to diabetes and will wait to see how that plays out. 

I guess many here (maybe you?)would sneer and call the tenants white trash but they often people who have fallen on hard times for a whole range of reasons and are without exception good Australians and wonderful people. 

Sorry to everyone being off topic back on topic Sptrawler feel free to debate the tread title rather than making personal jibes at people you have never met.


----------



## wayneL (14 December 2013)

IFocus said:


> The political middle ground is not screaming bias against the ABC but certainly those with vested interests and political agendas do.




One of my clients is a freelance journo and from knowing her, she is about as middle ground as you can get. Her opinion is that some sections of the ABC (not all) are most certainly very left wing dominated and ergo, biased.

Also commented on bias from other news sources, but agreed that the ABC in some circumstances disregrds and abuses its charter.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 December 2013)

The ABC seems to have a peculiar bias against the ADF.

Our servicemen and women answer for their actions through their command structure and ultimately to the Minister for Defence and Parliament and thus to the people of Australia.

ABC journalists have a tendency to revel in the failings of our armed forces, and exhibit a need to have the ADF answer to them, rather than the people.

The concoction that has recently been published against a serving member in Afghanistan, via questioning of a combat death that has already been investigated, gives succour to the enemies of our troops, rather than shed any light on justice or right in the ADF.

I fail to remember any positive articles from the ABC on our venture in Afghanistan.

A political stance is not what we need from our national broadcaster.

Support for our troops would be more appropriate. 

This is not to say that we should not debate the rights and wrongs of our involvement in that land of muppets and murderers that is Afghanistan.

The ABC needs to remember that it is the *Australian * Broadcasting Corporation.

Delivering our overseas broadcasting arm,  Australia Network,  in to a nest of left wing appartchiks would seem unwise in the extreme. 

gg


----------



## IFocus (15 December 2013)

wayneL said:


> One of my clients is a freelance journo and from knowing her, she is about as middle ground as you can get. Her opinion is that some sections of the ABC (not all) are most certainly very left wing dominated and ergo, biased.




I agreed and you could throw in homosexual, off beat, wacky, and the odd right wing nut job.

What you don't see much off (thankfully) is the tabloid commentary on the ABC which is what I think (maybe wrong) the right want on the ABC.

Annabel puts some context around just how ridiculous criticism has become

Piers Akerman on dangerous ground with Peppa Pig





> It's a grim Christmas here in the ABC trenches. Ordnance whistles overhead, and the whine of the air-raid sirens has become a normal feature of daily life.
> 
> One minute it's Miranda Devine strafing Behind The News. The next, it's a devastating artillery assault centring on the fact that Kerry O'Brien was paid - PAID! - to do his interviews with Paul Keating.






> The column started as a perfectly ordinary light-to-medium ABC-gumming on the usual theme of organisational leftist propaganda and generalised wickedness. But then, this: "Even the cartoon character Peppa Pig pushes a weird feminist line that would be closer to the hearts of Labor's Handbag Hit Squad than the preschool audience it is aimed at."
> 
> This is a serious allegation. Of all the programs watched on the ABC's iView platform, Peppa Pig is the most popular by a long straw. Between January and November this year, the show was watched 25 million times. That is correct, 25 million times; impressive, even when you factor in the possibility that several million of those might have been Mr Akerman, monitoring the cartoon piglet round the clock for signs of latent man-hate.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/piers...h-peppa-pig-20131214-2zdvx.html#ixzz2nUZkuqxw


----------



## Logique (15 December 2013)

The infiltration and control of the organisational culture by a Green-Left inner city elite is the problem. I do agree with Miranda Devine and Ray Evans, that:  


> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...lytelegraph/comments/abc_bias_plan_laughable/
> 
> ...Far better is the Ray Evans solution, to decentralise the ABC by splitting it into competing state organisations.
> 
> That would disempower Left-Green inner-city elites who control the culture and help the ABC fulfill its charter to “reflect the cultural diversity of the Australian community”...


----------



## sails (15 December 2013)

IFocus said:


> ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





I think Crabb is being a bit silly here.  It's not that O'Brien was paid, it's how much of taxpayer funds did he get to do an interview?

I think ALL taxpayers have a right to ask questions as to how their money is being spent.  Is it being spent wisely and does it benefit ALL Australians who pay for it.  I think it is reasonable to ask.  If there was no bias in the ABC then surely Crabb would not have written such a dramatic piece in an attempt to ridicule the millions of Aussies who are unhappy with the shows that have shown themselves to have clear labor/green bias.

There is much on the ABC that is good and non-political.  It's just a shame that so much bias does come through in some of their broadcasts.  And their selective news reporting such as not much on boat arrivals when labor was in office and now every boat arrivals.

Where is the corresponding table together with detailed notes to when labor was in office and let over 50,000 arrivals in? 

 I await with interest for such a detailed table showing the last 6 years since Rudd opened our borders - or even the last couple of years would do.  





Read more detailed notes here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-25/log-of-boat-arrivals-and-other-asylum-seeker-incidents/5014496


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 December 2013)

Logique said:


> The infiltration and control of the organisational culture by a Green-Left inner city elite is the problem.:




So true, Logique.

John Bridcut, an award winning British film maker and BBC critic, has ten criteria for a model public broadcaster.


*Accuracy, Balance, Context, Distance, Even-handedness, Fairness, Objectivity, Open-mindedness, Rigour, Self-Awareness, Transparency and Truth. 
*

See the recent Quadrant Online article on the ABC.

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2013/12/auntys-special-friend-bbc/

The ABC should look outside it's incestuous caravan, for guidance on what is valuable and not merely meretricious.

gg


----------



## noco (2 January 2014)

It now pretty evident the Labor Party did some dodgy deals with the ABC to asisst its own end and it is about time the ABC was brought into line.

Their alignment with the left wing Gaurdian has taken the ABC to its lowest level in years. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-over-foreign-tv/story-fn59niix-1226793393043


----------



## Ijustnewit (10 January 2014)

I note in the last couple of days the Leftist Green public service brigade from the ABC are back from their taxpayer funded Christmas and New Year break . They have have resumed where they left off , doing everything they can to undermine the Abbott government .


----------



## noco (10 January 2014)

"GLOBAL WARMING" what the 38 scientist went to prove in Antartica...........Shame on the ABC for claiming these scientist were tourist.....What an embarrassment!!!!!!!!

And now Niagra Falls has frozen and what do the alarmist say........."GLOBAL WARMING" is causing the big freeze in North America....No word from the ABC to date.

And now we have a heat wave in Australia......Yes it must be "GLOBAL WARMING".

Maybe we will see the Thames River in London freeze again.....It has happened before and long before 'GLOBAL WARMING" was invented..


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ion_warmists_are_on_board_the_ice_bound_ship/


----------



## IFocus (10 January 2014)

I am shocked no one reported this


Our trust in media: ABC still leads as commercial media struggle



> Australia’s mainstream media have drifted still lower in public trust in the last six months, according to Essential Research’s biannual Trust in Media survey.




Oh dear



> But even Liberal voters are far more trusting of the national broadcaster than of commercial media.






> Overall, the ABC has maintained its reputation for trust with users. Its television news was down a point compared to June last year, and its radio news up a point, but ultimately it remains far ahead of commercial media of all stripes in terms of the trust Australians place in what they see and hear on it, and not just for one section of the electorate, but across all voters.




http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/22/our-trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-as-commercial-media-struggle/


Carry on ranting folks...............


----------



## noco (10 January 2014)

IFocus said:


> I am shocked no one reported this
> 
> 
> Our trust in media: ABC still leads as commercial media struggle
> ...




Wel,well,well what have we here?

Firstly the said poll was conducted back on the 22nd January 2013....so it well out of date.

Secondly, Mr. Bernard Keane is a very biased Climate Change Alarmist to the fullest....his interview on Climate Changer propaganda was conducted by a Labor Party Left wing in one Craig Emmerson....you know the one with the melodious voice singing on the lawn of Parliament House......nuff said...

Some 90% of the interview revolved around the criticism of Tony Abbott's direct action plan.

Keane is so pro Labor and is so much in favour of the Carbon Dioxide Tax......So I don't believe he has much credibilityat all.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 January 2014)

http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/abbott-accuses-abc-of-working-against-aust/story-e6frfku9-1226812818671

It won't be long now before major changes are made in and to the ABC.

And about time too.

A one-sided political beast such as the National Broadcaster is not good for democracy.

gg


----------



## Ijustnewit (29 January 2014)

Yes , who better to write the story and have the ABC open up a comments page than Tonys biggest fan Latika Bourke .

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-29/tony-abbott-steps-up-criticism-of-abc/5224676


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 January 2014)

One wonders at the utter stupidity of the ABC, it's board and executive.

If I were leading it, knowing that a Government has been elected capable of making changes to it's Leftwing Bias, would I have promoted a traitor like Snowden or published scurrilous slurs about the Australian Navy, without basis? 

On the basis of the low brow ken of the Corporation alone, it deserves to be cut down by a severe funding review and privatisation of it's commercial assets.

gg


----------



## Knobby22 (29 January 2014)

Rubbish! You are just a Tony parrot.
What about the construction union stuff they found out about, that served Liberal purposes.
I want a strong ABC. If they want to sack the board and CEO , go for it, but don't cut it off from the knees because it competes with Murdoch. 

Destroying the ABC will be a backward step for Australia. Someone has to give unbiased Australian view points and look after the country people.

I voted Lib but if they want to lose my vote, go for it. I am sure I am not the only one.

BTW, I've played Angry Birds. Thanks to Snowden I now know that the CIA has all the information in my phone. I don't understand why we have to all act like sheep. I thought we were free.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 January 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Rubbish! You are just a Tony parrot.
> What about the construction union stuff they found out about, that served Liberal purposes.
> I want a strong ABC. If they want to sack the board and CEO , go for it, but don't cut it off from the knees because it competes with Murdoch.
> 
> ...




Thanks Knobby22

I once felt like you and was a defender of the ABC. 

They are seriously, a far Left/Green Juvenile Undergraduate-type show. 

They are as likely to destroy the ALP as the Coalition, and they have damn near achieved the former, divorcing Labor from it's Worker roots.

I would envisage the Coalition would endeavour to conserve the rural , regional and educational elements of the ABC, with a new focus on unbiased news reporting, which nobody in the ALP or Lib/Nats feel occurrs now. 

As for Tony Abbott, I do support him, but do not parrot anyone, and disagree with him on important elements of policy, but being a member of a Party, respect the majority opinion within limits. 

The ABC is a city based, trendy, insular, overpaid, classist and reeking pot of pustulating excrement, laughing at ordinary Australians and what Australians value.

There, you've made me say it. 

gg


----------



## Knobby22 (29 January 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Thanks Knobby22
> 
> I once felt like you and was a defender of the ABC.
> 
> ...





GG

I am sure the Coalition can achieve this aim without major funding cuts to the ABC. 
We know Murdoch pressured the English PM, to defund the BBC, which didn't happen. It is important we don't give in to such pressures.


----------



## Logique (29 January 2014)

Why does the ABC hate our Navy? Indeed the question may be asked, especially by the sailors!

I understand that Malcolm Turnbull is the relevant Minister for Communications. But he's not communicating much on the subject of the ABC, not publicly anyway. No doubt behind the scenes, thrashing them with a wet lettuce.


----------



## So_Cynical (29 January 2014)

Logique said:


> Why does the ABC hate our Navy? Indeed the question may be asked, especially by the sailors!
> 
> I understand that Malcolm Turnbull is the relevant Minister for Communications. But he's not communicating much on the subject of the ABC, not publicly anyway. No doubt behind the scenes, thrashing them with a wet lettuce.




I would of thought its fair to say that the Government in general is not communicating with anyone, lucky to see Tony once per week on the news, and couldn't tell you the last time i saw Malcolm on the telly, would of been around the time of the NBN policy release...you know the policy that has had more back flips than the education policy.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 January 2014)

So it's wrong for the ABC, or media in general, to talk about the things the Government or military have been up to that may no thave been in the national interest?

Was it the Greens Labor extremists in the ABC and Fairfax media that did more to show the corruption in the building industry than even the bastion of balanced reporting at News Limited.

Seriously, Tony sounds like he'd be happy to cosy up with Mao and have some Ministry of Truth adjuncts running things.

Media showing the dirty laundry is about the only thing that keeps the politico business elite from going too far.


----------



## sptrawler (29 January 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> I would of thought its fair to say that the Government in general is not communicating with anyone, lucky to see Tony once per week on the news, and couldn't tell you the last time i saw Malcolm on the telly, would of been around the time of the NBN policy release...you know the policy that has had more back flips than the education policy.




Yes, and isn't it great.
Switching on the t.v and not seeing politicians blowing their feet off, or carrying on like auditioning soap opera stars is like a breath of fresh air.

When labor were in one of the goons would be on every night, explaing some stuff up or internal party squabble.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 January 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> So it's wrong for the ABC, or media in general, to talk about the things the Government or military have been up to that may no thave been in the national interest?
> 
> Media showing the dirty laundry is about the only thing that keeps the politico business elite from going too far.




It is reasonable for these matters to be discussed, WHERE THERE IS EVIDENCE OR CORROBORATION, not as part of a continual wearing down in a pseudo- entertaining fashion of journalism, which refuses to fact check or support the Australian interest.

That joke of a report from ABC DJakarta could have as easily been a pissed Aussie tourist from Bali with a bloody Mexican hat on his head, as a reporter. 

He just blindly believed a mob of balts and Indon Corrupt Police, instead of considering it may have been a put up to show our Navy in a bad light. 

Perhaps on reflection a pissed Aussie in Bali with a Mexican hat, would not have been as stupid and idiotic, to make such a slur, without evidence. 

GUT THE ABC I SAY.

gg


----------



## IFocus (29 January 2014)

The ABC regularly served up brick bats to Rudd and Gillard ridiculing them for their poor politics dont recall Abbott being upset then.

Just shows how fragile the conservatives are in this country or how determine they are to rule the media and perpetrate there own propaganda like how our relationship with Indonesia is its highest priority.


----------



## sptrawler (29 January 2014)

IFocus said:


> The ABC regularly served up brick bats to Rudd and Gillard ridiculing them for their poor politics




I think you're getting your programmes mixed up, that was the Bolt report. 
Which by the way, was another crappy politically biased show.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 January 2014)

IFocus said:


> The ABC regularly served up brick bats to Rudd and Gillard ridiculing them for their poor politics dont recall Abbott being upset then.
> 
> Just shows how fragile the conservatives are in this country or how determine they are to rule the media and perpetrate there own propaganda like how our relationship with Indonesia is its highest priority.




IFocus, you have been schmoozed by Green and ABC Spin.

There is a lack of curiosity in ABC reporting, and a lack of rigour.

Fair enough if the Australian Navy had tortured Balts in boats, but the story really never stood up.

A rush to publication was the name of the game. 

No statement from our Navy before publication. 

I really believe the Correspondent in DJakarta has never been outside that city, and certainly has no knowledge of how the Indon Police and Army suck off and screw the population in which they operate.

It defies understanding how the ABC couuld have been SO BLOODY STUPID. 

gg


----------



## Julia (29 January 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Rubbish! You are just a Tony parrot.



That might be a little unfair.



> What about the construction union stuff they found out about,



That's a valid point and it has been the lead story on 7.30 for the last two nights.  Good stuff and showing the unions in a very poor light.

But the bias on radio can be seen in the reporting of the above this evening.  The program was referred to briefly, said - unbelievably - absolutely nothing about the actual damning revelations of the whistleblower, and went straight to a sound grab of Ged Kearney, President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, saying any Royal Commission would be purely politically based and designed by Tony Abbott to destroy the unions.

So it's this sort of selective quoting that so upsets people.

The actual interview presented Leigh Sales asking very relevant and decisive questions of Ms Kearney which the latter failed to answer satisfactorily, looking pretty rattled.

Imo the 7.30 account followed by Leigh Sales interviewing Kearney was first rate and unsparing of anything to do with the unions and should be acknowledged for this.



> I want a strong ABC. If they want to sack the board and CEO , go for it, but don't cut it off from the knees because it competes with Murdoch.



It does need a complete rethink and this probably needs to come from a change at the top.

It will never be 'cut off from the knees' for any reason because too many people in regional areas are entirely dependent on it and it's marvellous in a crisis like a flood.

Also, the political bias is just one facet of the organisation.  There are some great programs on literature and music, some top interviews and commentary, just as there are the ultra Left contributions where the group think takes over completely.



Logique said:


> Why does the ABC hate our Navy? Indeed the question may be asked, especially by the sailors!
> 
> I understand that Malcolm Turnbull is the relevant Minister for Communications. But he's not communicating much on the subject of the ABC, not publicly anyway. No doubt behind the scenes, thrashing them with a wet lettuce.



No wonder the Left continue to call for Mr Turnbull to take the leadership.  He echoes their philosophy.
It works well for them that in his brief attempt at leading the Libs, Mr Turnbull failed dismally and will never imo be given another chance by his party.  He might, however, provide a valid alternative to Mr Shorten if the Labor Party would care to adopt him.


----------



## noco (29 January 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> I would of thought its fair to say that the Government in general is not communicating with anyone, lucky to see Tony once per week on the news, and couldn't tell you the last time i saw Malcolm on the telly, would of been around the time of the NBN policy release...you know the policy that has had more back flips than the education policy.




Abbott and Turnbull are out there doing there jobs and are not media tarts like Rudd/Gillard and Beattie on the tele every day with there lies and propaganda......Is that what you would like to see every day again?


----------



## dutchie (30 January 2014)

Abbott condemns ABC

http://www.news.com.au/national/abc...vice-may-be-axed/story-fncynjr2-1226813558288


"...with Prime Minister Tony Abbott yesterday accusing it of acting against Australia's interests."

It's definitely *not* our ABC.


----------



## sydboy007 (30 January 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is reasonable for these matters to be discussed, WHERE THERE IS EVIDENCE OR CORROBORATION, not as part of a continual wearing down in a pseudo- entertaining fashion of journalism, which refuses to fact check or support the Australian interest.
> 
> That joke of a report from ABC DJakarta could have as easily been a pissed Aussie tourist from Bali with a bloody Mexican hat on his head, as a reporter.
> 
> ...




I agree it was most likely the people self harmed, but then we are talking about the same military that has for decades covered up quite a bit of sexual abuse cases and some off behaviour of personnel in the middle east.  So I'm 99.9% sure it's not true, but I'd prefer the claims in the public domain where there's more light on the matter and it's much more likely the truth will prevail.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 January 2014)

I know where this is heading.

We will find Radio Australia will become  Skychannel and owned by a USA company and therefore we can be sure USA interests will be foremost in the broadcast.

Our strong investigative reporters overseas will be culled ensuring we will receive a foreign view of the world rather than an own view.

Internally our investigative reports will also be culled leading to thriving corruption. it will be far more difficult to "Keep the Bastards honest".

Our media will be dumbed down and we will be treated like mushrooms so that if anything happens that doesn't reflect well on us or our partners, ....such as the recent information that the game Angry Birds (owned by Disney) has been used to hack our phones by the CIA will be considered traitorous (not our ABC). 

It's not black and white guys. it's not "The Australian" good and "ABC" bad. If we destroy the ABC, I fear for Australia.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

You can call me cynical, however Ifind it strange that the ABC wait untill Labor are out of office before releasing stories on union corruption.
Now we have them releasing the story of Labors intervening in an asylum seekers case. When as the last paragraph states they obviously had knowlege of it prior to the election.
I doubt the same favours would have been extended to Abbott, a wiff of a story and it was headline news,

Over the past five months the ABC has repeatedly asked people connected to the case for an interview including; Fawad Ahmed, Grant Poulter and James Sutherland from Cricket Australia, Labor frontbenchers Chris Bowen and Brendan O'Connor, Derek Bennett from Melbourne University Cricket Club and Immigration Minister Scott Morrison. Some declined or didn't respond. Others offered interviews with strict conditions the ABC could not agree to. The ABC has omitted some personal information contained in the confidential documents for privacy reasons.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-...awad-ahmed-asylum-case-was-borderline/5225808

Knobby all people want, is the ABC to be an Australian Braodcasting Commission. Not the public funded Labor Party media department.IMO


----------



## Ijustnewit (30 January 2014)

Now the Coalition MP's are feuding according to the ABC. How about Tony and Malcolm have differing views ??
No way,  the ABC turn it into a FEUD !! Another day , another attempt to destabilize the current Government.

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-30/coalition-feuds-over-treatment-of-abc/5227570

Yes another Latika Bourke piece of journalistic brilliance .


----------



## Julia (30 January 2014)

sptrawler said:


> You can call me cynical, however Ifind it strange that the ABC wait untill Labor are out of office before releasing stories on union corruption.



How do you know they had completed the investigation, along with Fairfax, whilst Labor were still in government?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 January 2014)

ABC Local Radio is still the best for local information and support in bad weather and disasters.

Support your Local ABC in the Reorganisation of the ABC.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

Julia said:


> How do you know they had completed the investigation, along with Fairfax, whilst Labor were still in government?




I don't know and I can't find the article on their website.

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

It's easy to find articles on Tony Abbotts criticism of the ABC. It's in the column 'past hour', 'past 24 hours', 'past week' and past month.
No mention of the CFMEU in any column or looking in older stories.


----------



## overhang (30 January 2014)

So Abbott has ordered an efficiency study into the ABC yet when a similar study was ordered only 8 years ago it found that the ABC was efficient and actually required an additional 126 million over 3 years to maintain its operations.  Of course that wasn't the result the coalition government wanted and never granted the additional funding.http://www.crikey.com.au/wp-content...oard-b7c7b4dd-5e73-43ca-9152-05ed656c3b93.pdf

If many of you had your wishes we would be left in a state of disarray, we would basically only have the choice of the Murdoch press or Fairfax and I'm not even going to bother mentioning The Guardian.  In the past I've not denied an ABC bias but once again I don't believe its as extreme as many of you do however I don't listen to much radio so maybe that's why.  I do think many on here that complain most likely follow the Murdoch press, if we're talking relative to each other then there is no way you can read the Murdoch press and believe its struck a good middle ground of balance and then see the ABC as anything but a Labor mouthpiece.  Unfortunately in Australia we are really starved for choice when it comes to tabloids and I think killing off the public broadcaster would further damage the journalism in this country. 

Maybe an independent body is needed to review complaints of bias at the ABC.  I would like this addressed as any journalists with a right leaning will avoid working for the ABC given the reputation and then we'll really be left with a lefty mouthpiece, maybe this has happened already.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

Overhang, what we are starved of is a decent news media.
We have Murdoch to the right.
Faifax and ABC to the left.
SBS in the middle east.
Chanels 7,9 and 10 making news into a absolute joke, that is a cross between a weekly magazine and a local community lost and found show. 
How the hell can they say "On the news tommorrow night", tommorrow it isn't news.

Why can't someone just give us the news, as it is.


----------



## IFocus (30 January 2014)

Every government try's to run the media but Abbott's overt pressure on the ABC and sucking up to media moguls is really disgusting, middle Australia just are not going to buy it, the WA senate election is looking more interesting each day.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

IFocus said:


> Every government try's to run the media but Abbott's overt pressure on the ABC and sucking up to media moguls is really disgusting, middle Australia just are not going to buy it, the WA senate election is looking more interesting each day.




Aren't you forgetting, oh so quickly, the pressure Rudd/Gillard was putting on News Corp. 
Oh how easy the memory slips.


----------



## Julia (30 January 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I don't know and I can't find the article on their website.



Neither can I find any evidence anywhere to the effect that the ABC had sat on this union corruption story during the time Labor was in government despite some considerable searching.  Absolutely nothing to suggest the combined ABC/Fairfax investigation has not just recently been completed.

I'm frequently irritated by the bias at the ABC, but at the same time, don't think it's fair to make allegations against them that seem to have no basis in fact.
Happy to change my mind in this instance if any evidence appears to substantiate your earlier assertion that they could have brought this story to the public attention whilst Labor was in power.

Overhang makes some valid points.   

Separately, tonight on 7.30 is the first time I've seen Malcolm Turnbull become a bit tongue tied.
Or perhaps this was my inbuilt bias against Mr Turnbull at work?  How did others see the interview?


----------



## burglar (30 January 2014)

The ABC used to be my favourite, but nowadays, it's the Off button.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

Julia said:


> Neither can I find any evidence anywhere to the effect that the ABC had sat on this union corruption story during the time Labor was in government despite some considerable searching.  Absolutely nothing to suggest the combined ABC/Fairfax investigation has not just recently been completed.
> 
> ?




Can you find the article at all on their website?


----------



## noco (30 January 2014)

No doubt the ABC has their reasons for discrediting Australia and Abbott and it has to be put down to the influence of the Labor Party with thieir engagement of pro left wing employees over 6 years of Labor rule.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...loose-with-truth/story-fni0ffsx-1226813357973


----------



## Julia (30 January 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Can you find the article at all on their website?



What article are you referring to?

I'm asking for any article, anywhere, by anyone at all which demonstrates that the ABC has sat on this union corruption stuff whilst Labor was in power.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2014)

Julia said:


> What article are you referring to?
> 
> .




The article you were refering to in your post,duh.
Obviously this conversation is going nowhere.


----------



## dutchie (31 January 2014)

Wonder if the Australian Navy and the government will get an apology from the ABC ???

Unlikely!


Asylum-seekers' real stories revealed 

TWO Somalis at the centre of grave allegations against the Australian navy in recent turn-back operations admit their burns were sustained during clashes with the sailors, who in one case had been forced to prevent asylum-seekers scuttling their boat.

The ABC last week reported claims by asylum-seekers that they were "beaten" by navy personnel "and told to hold on to parts of a hot engine on a boat being towed back to Indonesia".

The government and Defence have vehemently rejected claims the asylum-seekers were mistreated. And the new accounts of the incidents provided to The Australian yesterday, which suggest the injuries happened during scuffles, cast further doubt on the claims of deliberate abuse.

It has also emerged that the person who made the most serious claims to the ABC *was not on board the boat* where the alleged abuse took place.

(my bolds)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...tories-revealed/story-fn9hm1gu-1226814426441#


----------



## IFocus (31 January 2014)

More bad ABC............... 

Clarke and Dawe: Turning Back The News Where It Is Safe To Do So


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-30/clarke-and-dawe--turning-back-the-news-where-it-is/5228254


----------



## wayneL (31 January 2014)

The reds at GetUp are circulating a petition to maintain political bias at ABC.


----------



## drsmith (31 January 2014)

Scott Morrison will appear today at a Senate inquiry in Canberra on the government's OSB policy. Below is how this is being reported by the three major media outlets.

The Australian,



> In a surprise move - and an attempt to tackle head on charges of excessive secrecy - Mr Morrison will appear at a Labor/Greens-dominated Senate inquiry in Canberra today to defend the government's Operation Sovereign Borders policy.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...olicy-offensive/story-fn9hm1gu-1226814437544#

The SMH,



> Immigration Minister Scott Morrison will appear before a Senate inquiry on Friday, as he continues to defend the federal government's approach towards asylum seeker boats.
> 
> In three interviews and a doorstop on Friday morning, Mr Morrison confirmed that he would attend the Senate hearing that will scrutinise the government's claim that it does not have to provide regular updates to the Senate about Operation Sovereign Borders.






> Mr Morrison is due to appear before the Senate committee after 1pm on Friday, along with top military officers and government officials.
> 
> He said he was appearing of his own initiative because he wanted to ''stand beside'' those implementing the government's border protection regime.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...e-on-asylum-seeker-policy-20140131-31qho.html

The ABC,



> Mr Morrison is set to face a grilling today from Labor and Greens senators when he fronts a Senate inquiry into the Federal Government's refusal to release key documents about border protection.
> 
> The committee requested to speak to government representatives along with officials from Defence, Immigration and Customs.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-...as-sprayed-in-eyes-by-australian-navy/5229362


----------



## Julia (31 January 2014)

sptrawler said:


> You can call me cynical, however I*find it strange that the ABC wait untill Labor are out of office before releasing stories on union corruption.*




 (My bolds above)  I asked how you knew the ABC had sat on the story, broadcast on "7.30" on two nights this week, whilst Labor were in power, because  I've heard no suggestion anywhere that the ABC and Fairfax have not just completed this investigation.




Julia said:


> I'm asking for any article, anywhere, by anyone at all which demonstrates that the ABC has sat on this union corruption stuff whilst Labor was in power.






sptrawler said:


> The article you were refering to in your post,duh.
> Obviously this conversation is going nowhere.




Hopefully the above will clarify what I was asking.


----------



## drsmith (31 January 2014)

drsmith said:


> The ABC,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-...as-sprayed-in-eyes-by-australian-navy/5229362




The ABC has changed the first paragraph in the above story from this (Google cache),

Somali asylum seeker claims he was sprayed in eyes by Australian ...
www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-31/asylum-seeker/5229362 8 hours ago -‎



> New details have emerged about asylum seeker claims that Australian sailors mistreated them during a boat interception operation earlier this month.




https://www.google.com.au/#q="New+d...t+interception+operation+earlier+this+month."

to this (1h40min ago),



> New details have emerged about a boat interception operation earlier this month, with one asylum seeker saying Navy personnel sprayed him in the eyes.




A call from Malcolm Turnbull ?


----------



## sptrawler (31 January 2014)

Julia said:


> (My bolds above)  I asked how you knew the ABC had sat on the story, broadcast on "7.30" on two nights this week, whilst Labor were in power, because  I've heard no suggestion anywhere that the ABC and Fairfax have not just completed this investigation.
> 
> Hopefully the above will clarify what I was asking.




As I said i tried to look up the article to re read it but couldn't find it on the ABC, website, which in itself, I find strange. I stand corrected if there wasn't any date reference.
Upon looking at the second article, it makes mention that they had been trying to contact people for 5 months as I posted.


----------



## Julia (31 January 2014)

sptrawler said:


> As I said i tried to look up the article to re read it but couldn't find it on the ABC, website, which in itself, I find strange.



If you go back to your original post on the subject, on the previous page, which was what originally aroused my interest, you provided a link to the ABC.  I've just tried this again and it works without any problem.
As far as I can tell, however, it's all about some cricketer:  nothing at all to do with union corruption.

It's not my responsibility to defend the ABC and I'm not, but we need to be fair, and I cannot find, nor apparently can you, any justification for your suggestion that they had been sitting on the revelations about union corruption whilst the Labor government was in power.



> I stand corrected if there wasn't any date reference.



OK.  Fine.


----------



## DB008 (1 February 2014)

Nervous??





> *It's our ABC, so hands off, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull*
> 
> 
> The federal government has picked a fight with the national broadcaster.
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/its-our-abc-so-hands-off-tony-abbott-and-malcolm-turnbull-20140131-31sa6.html#ixzz2s1pEGgv9


----------



## noco (1 February 2014)

There is little doubt from the link below that the Labor Party had a major influence over the ABC.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...with-a-vengeance/story-e6frg75f-1226815285293


----------



## Solly (1 February 2014)

If you have any issue with the ABC and consider there is a breach of their code of conduct under Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, nothing will be resolved on this thread.

Go here, http://about.abc.net.au/talk-to-the-abc/feedback-and-enquiries/complaints-process/

If you are unhappy with the response, go here >  http://www.acma.gov.au/Citizen/Take...st-complaints/complaints-about-the-abc-or-sbs

I look forward to your published responses.


----------



## sptrawler (2 February 2014)

Good old Barrie Cassidy is jumping in, here is his 'boldly hightlighted paragraph to the article'


*2014 promises a mixed bag of elections, but don't count on any single result giving you a guide to the popularity of the Abbott Government, writes Barrie Cassidy.*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-31/cassidy-2014-elections/5228738

The article is a great guide to see how Abbott is travelling.


----------



## drsmith (2 February 2014)

Some movement from within ?



> As the ABC comes under government scrutiny, staff have been warned not to ''embellish'' or add ''any flourish'' to asylum seekers' claims they have been mistreated by border protection forces.
> 
> *Head of ABC news content Gaven Morris sent the directive to the organisation's top brass on Friday morning*, less than 24 hours after the government announced it would conduct an ''efficiency study'' into the ABC's operations.




http://www.smh.com.au/national/dont...m-seekers-abc-warns-staff-20140201-31txl.html

The timing is interesting,

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=23929&page=54&p=811708&viewfull=1#post811708

My bolds.


----------



## Tink (2 February 2014)

Solly said:


> If you have any issue with the ABC and consider there is a breach of their code of conduct under Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, nothing will be resolved on this thread.
> 
> Go here, http://about.abc.net.au/talk-to-the-abc/feedback-and-enquiries/complaints-process/
> 
> ...




Thanks for sharing that, Solly


----------



## noco (2 February 2014)

I believe the ABC have received the message which has gone down the line.....Shape up or ship oit.



http://www.smh.com.au/national/dont...m-seekers-abc-warns-staff-20140201-31txl.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 February 2014)

Solly said:


> If you have any issue with the ABC and consider there is a breach of their code of conduct under Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, nothing will be resolved on this thread.
> 
> Go here, http://about.abc.net.au/talk-to-the-abc/feedback-and-enquiries/complaints-process/
> 
> ...




The ABC has been moving left and been infiltrated by leftists and Marxists since the 1970's. They just call themselves Greens now.

The links you give, have been used on numerous occasions to make complaints, without any meaningful result.

It is a complete waste of time to "Complain to Caesar, about what Caesar does"

Anyone who uses the complaint process either needs their head read, or has too little to do with too much time on their hands.

gg


----------



## noco (2 February 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The ABC has been moving left and been infiltrated by leftists and Marxists since the 1970's. They just call themselves Greens now.
> 
> The links you give, have been used on numerous occasions to make complaints, without any meaningful result.
> 
> ...




+ 1 GG...I have given up in laying compliants to the ABC......you can never get any sense out of them......As you say, they (Labor) have been planting lefties into the ABC for many years.....time for some ethnic cleansing.


----------



## Logique (2 February 2014)

ABC TV _Offsiders_, a half hour sports program, this morning had as co-host that noted sports journalist Waleed Aly.

Darling of the luvvie Left, but what are his sports credentials? Unless he was there as Commissar. There were 4 other (bona fide) sports journalist co-hosts.

Waleed urged us not to even think about the little girl escorted from arena by security, in the full glare of national tv, and detained for 2 hours against her will. It was Adam Goodes who was the real victim, apparently.


----------



## Julia (2 February 2014)

Solly said:


> If you have any issue with the ABC and consider there is a breach of their code of conduct under Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, nothing will be resolved on this thread.
> 
> Go here, http://about.abc.net.au/talk-to-the-abc/feedback-and-enquiries/complaints-process/
> 
> ...



Their complaints process is an absolute joke.  You can send them verbatim examples of the most egregious bias and they will find a way to justify it.

Further, emails of specific complaints to the program concerned simply go unanswered.

I don't think in my entire life I've ever encountered any organisation which is such a law unto itself and which possesses such a sense of moral superiority over anyone who fails to subscribe to its philosophy.
Like most of the Left, they have developed sneering into an art form.


----------



## Solly (2 February 2014)

Julia said:


> Their complaints process is an absolute joke.  You can send them verbatim examples of the most egregious bias and they will find a way to justify it.
> 
> Further, emails of specific complaints to the program concerned simply go unanswered.
> 
> ...




Are you alleging specific incidents of breaches in their Charter and or Code of Conduct? 

If so, it may be of interest to obtain a view from ACMA so it can be scrutinised if an infraction has occurred.  

The legislative framework that the ABC works within has very definite boundaries and serious consequences for non-compliance and displays of bias.

I would be eager to review a response from ACMA regarding such an event. 

S


----------



## drsmith (2 February 2014)

Solly said:


> The legislative framework that the ABC works within has very definite boundaries and serious consequences for non-compliance and displays of bias.



It's well past that. An internal warning have already been sent and the timeframe suggests it had an immediate impact on the emphasis of one story, which was changed.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=23929&page=54&p=811951&viewfull=1#post811951

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=23929&page=54&p=811708&viewfull=1#post811708

As for consequences, did you watch the ABC's Insiders this morning? Niki Savva didn't paint a particularly bright future for the ABC's Australia Network.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 February 2014)

Solly said:


> If you have any issue with the ABC and consider there is a breach of their code of conduct under Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, nothing will be resolved on this thread.
> 
> Go here, http://about.abc.net.au/talk-to-the-abc/feedback-and-enquiries/complaints-process/
> 
> ...






Garpal Gumnut said:


> The ABC has been moving left and been infiltrated by leftists and Marxists since the 1970's. They just call themselves Greens now.
> 
> The links you give, have been used on numerous occasions to make complaints, without any meaningful result.
> 
> ...






noco said:


> + 1 GG...I have given up in laying compliants to the ABC......you can never get any sense out of them......As you say, they (Labor) have been planting lefties into the ABC for many years.....time for some ethnic cleansing.






Julia said:


> Their complaints process is an absolute joke.  You can send them verbatim examples of the most egregious bias and they will find a way to justify it.
> 
> Further, emails of specific complaints to the program concerned simply go unanswered.
> 
> ...






Solly said:


> Are you alleging specific incidents of breaches in their Charter and or Code of Conduct?
> 
> If so, it may be of interest to obtain a view from ACMA so it can be scrutinised if an infraction has occurred.
> 
> ...




The points that posters are making, Solly, hinge on the fact that the ABC and ACMA have a history of tin ears and legalism in their handling of complaints. 

It is too late for the ABC. 

The ABC will suffer for it's bias, through our elected representatives.

gg


----------



## DB008 (2 February 2014)

More propaganda going around....


----------



## Solly (2 February 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The points that posters are making, Solly, hinge on the fact that the ABC and ACMA have a history of tin ears and legalism in their handling of complaints.
> 
> It is too late for the ABC.
> 
> ...




GG

I am still interested to review a written response from either the ABC or ACMA regarding a lodged complaint. 
Including the material content of the complaint.
I suppose it's my evidence based background the steers me in this direction. 

Interestingly in 2006 an efficiency review of the ABC conducted by KPMG concluded that additional funding was required. 

http://www.crikey.com.au/wp-content...oard-b7c7b4dd-5e73-43ca-9152-05ed656c3b93.pdf

( Source:  @bairdjulia )

Although this may now leave an avenue to attempt to revise it's current Charter. Any amendment to the ABC Act would be a brave move for any government.

I also wonder if Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott share the same view regarding the future direction of the ABC.
It appears to me that it's not a united voice. I look forward to their future public discussions on the matter. 

S


----------



## DB008 (2 February 2014)

There must have been a urgent memo passed out to all ABC stakeholders...."Dump as much **** on Abbott ASAP before any changes start"

To even compare Abbott (or Australia) to Putin (Russia) is a sick joke. Putin takes out journalists (literally puts hits on them). 





> *Do to the ABC what Putin did to Russia's media? That's un-Australian*
> 
> 
> 
> ...










> *List of journalists killed in Russia*
> 
> In its September 2009 report the Committee to Protect Journalists repeated its conclusion that Russia was one of the deadliest countries in the world for journalists and added that it remains among the worst at solving their murders. The Anatomy of Injustice[6] (Russian version: Анатомия безнаказанности[7]) offers an account of the deaths of 17 journalists in Russia since 2000. They died or were killed, the CPJ is convinced, because of the work they were doing and in only one case, it notes, has there been a partially successful prosecution.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia#Under_Putin_.28incl._2nd_Chechen_conflict.29








> *Journalistic death toll in Putin's Russia*
> 
> "In 2011, three journalists dead (including newspaper editor Khadzhimurad Kamalov, shot 14 times as he left his office).
> 
> ...


----------



## So_Cynical (2 February 2014)

You guys are in government and yet the endless complaining continues, what gives?

Seriously...an outsider looking at the activities of the ASF right would have to come to the conclusion that your a bunch of whiners and complainers with nothing better to do, the modern equivalent of those nutters that used to write opinions pieces to the newspapers...back when newspapers reported news.


----------



## wayneL (2 February 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are in government and yet the endless complaining continues, what gives?
> 
> Seriously...an outsider looking at the activities of the ASF right would have to come to the conclusion that your a bunch of whiners and complainers with nothing better to do, the modern equivalent of those nutters that used to write opinions pieces to the newspapers...back when newspapers reported news.




As if there was any further evidence required to prove the veracity of wayneL's Law, between here and the shrill left wing nutters on FB and fora, substantiation is richly abundant.

GetUp is laughable on any objective level.


----------



## noco (2 February 2014)

The ABC chickens are finally coming home to roost........I dare them come up with more false stories.......They have been caught out once too often........their game is over.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...in-a-sea-of-bias/story-fni0ffxg-1226816080340


----------



## sptrawler (3 February 2014)

Well noco, the labor party and the ABC couldn't discredit Abbott when he was in opposition.
i think Barry Cassidy and the rest are going to be getting a bit nervous, about their future.
They really have brought it on themselves and have no one else to blame.


----------



## Tink (3 February 2014)

Best thing that has happened this week.

I have noticed the rubbish that was on their website is gone.


----------



## drsmith (3 February 2014)

ABC managing director Mark Scott today in defence of the ABC's asylum seeker coverage,



> But Mr Scott defended the ABC's decision to cover the story, saying it had never sought to be "judge and jury" on the asylum seekers claims.
> 
> "The ABC did not say that these allegations had been proved. The ABC said that they were important allegations and we went pursuing the truth," he said.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...-phone-calls-to-abc-managing-director/5235024

The problem for the ABC and Mark Scott is that in its reporting, it jumped to the following conclusion and in that sense made a judgement.



> Video footage appears to back asylum seeker claims of Navy mistreatment




http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2013/s3929794.htm


----------



## Julia (3 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> ABC managing director Mark Scott today in defence of the ABC's asylum seeker coverage,
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...-phone-calls-to-abc-managing-director/5235024
> ...



This was a fascinating interview.  My impression was that in a back room Mr Scott and Mr Colvin got together and agreed they needed to put something out to the critics that demonstrated their astonishing level of self scrutiny.  So they wrote themselves a script where both interviewer and respondent played their prescribed parts, thus demonstrating to the critics how fair the ABC is in examining itself.

For all that, Mark Colvin did indeed ask the necessary questions, even repeated some of them for emphasis, so imo came out with the appearance at least of being objective.
Mr Scott's responses, however, seemed to me like rationalisation of the highest order.

drsmith, what was your impression of the interview?


----------



## sptrawler (4 February 2014)

Great report by the ABC, suggests there is a bias with the funding of Cadbury, as opposed to the lack of funding for SPC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-03/abbott-cadbury-funding/5236004


Now it lends itself for Leigh Sales, to expand on the story and find out the rationale behind it.
That is what the ABC should be about.
Not Jumping in and making judgements and taking sides.

Put forward the issues, let both sides of politics make their points and let the people decide.

Let the commercial media try to pick the audience. 

Keep the ABC impartial.

The ABC were respected for this quality.


----------



## drsmith (4 February 2014)

This seems to summarise developments in the past 24 hours,



> COMMUNICATIONS Minister Malcolm Turnbull has issued a thinly veiled warning to the ABC to correct and apologise for errors, as senior cabinet figures voiced outrage and backbenchers seethed over the broadcaster's handling of claims that asylum-seekers were deliberately burnt by defence personnel.
> 
> Immigration Minister Scott Morrison yesterday demanded the broadcaster apologise for "outrageous slurs" against the navy while Joe Hockey revealed he has been so angry on occasions at ABC coverage he had called managing director Mark Scott to say "this is outrageous".
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...alcolm-turnbull/story-fn9hm1gu-1226817106491#

Last night's ABC Media Watch,

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3937354.htm


----------



## Logique (4 February 2014)

Media Watch this week confirmed that the collective are squirming. Let them propagate all the propaganda they like, the evidence of left wing bias is overwhelming. 

I believe the holding to account of the national broadcaster has majority public support. The ABC is bloated and smug after years of Labor-Green government.

On the subject of Media Watch, new host Paul Barry is a big improvement on the previous, 'ole Sneery, and not just because Barry last night claimed to have voted Liberal last time around.


----------



## IFocus (4 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> ABC managing director Mark Scott today in defence of the ABC's asylum seeker coverage,
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...-phone-calls-to-abc-managing-director/5235024
> ...




Unprecedented attack by a government obsessed in turning back the news.

The issues with the ABC are easily explained its not what they have said is the problem but what everyone (bitter conservatives) think they said..............


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 February 2014)

Logique said:


> Media Watch this week confirmed that the collective are squirming. Let them propagate all the propaganda they like, the evidence of left wing bias is overwhelming.
> 
> I believe the holding to account of the national broadcaster has majority public support. The ABC is bloated and smug after years of Labor-Green government.
> 
> On the subject of Media Watch, new host Paul Barry is a big improvement on the previous, 'ole Sneery, and not just because Barry last night claimed to have voted Liberal last time around.




I note that the ABC Spin is out, on the disgraceful uncorroborated slur on and propaganda against the Royal Australian Navy. 

The Collective at the ABC are saying the "Story is the boats, not the ABC". Infact it is "The Navy and the ABC's deriliction of Good Journalistic Standards" as pointed out by Paul Barry on Media Watch last night. 

gg


----------



## noco (4 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> Unprecedented attack by a government obsessed in turning back the news.
> 
> The issues with the ABC are easily explained its not what they have said is the problem but what everyone (bitter conservatives) think they said..............




NO,NO,NO.......The ABC have got it wrong again with reference to our diplomatic relationship with Jakarta.

First, a lot of commentators are determined that the Abbott government can do nothing effective or right in foreign policy. But to be fair, a more important factor is the confusing nature of Indonesian policy in recent weeks. Not long before Djoko's announcement other Indonesian military figures, nowhere near as senior as Djoko but important nevertheless, had announced that Indonesia would move naval resources to the south to guard against Australian incursions into Indonesian waters. This followed the Australian Border Protection Command discovering that some Australian ships had accidentally strayed into waters inside Indonesia's 12-nautical-mile zone. Immediately this was realised, the Abbott government notified Jakarta, apologised unreservedly and instituted an internal investigation.

These statements thrilled the most vocal enemies of the Abbott government within Australia as they seemed to promise what these folks have long ardently wished for - a full blown crisis between Canberra and Jakarta. But within a couple of days, the Indonesian government line had changed totally and in fact was delivering exactly what Australia most wanted. These comments from Djoko's spokesman chimed with statements by Indonesia's Foreign Minister, Marty Natalegawa, that any naval moves in Indonesia's south were "not an unfriendly act" towards any other nation. So the Indonesian government position moved radically within a couple of days.





http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...jakartas-onboard/story-e6frg76f-1226817003030


----------



## drsmith (4 February 2014)

Finally.



> The ABC says the wording of a story which reported claims from asylum seekers that they were mistreated by Australian Navy personnel should have been "more precise".
> 
> In a joint statement, the corporation's managing director, Mark Scott, and its director of news, Kate Torney, say they "regret if our reporting led anyone to mistakenly assume that the ABC supported the asylum seekers' claims".




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...ey-asylum-seeker-wording-more-precise/5238180


----------



## So_Cynical (4 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> Finally.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...ey-asylum-seeker-wording-more-precise/5238180




Finally what? 

key words in your quote are more and if.


----------



## wayneL (5 February 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> Finally what?
> 
> key words in your quote are more and if.




Just typical ABC/leftist weasel words. The cold hard fact is that the reporting was biased and the ABC got busted over it, forcing a grudging apology.

+++++++++


One thing the ABC does exceptionally well is comedy. News Radio advertising themselves as  "without bias or agenda" nearly made me drive off the Bruce Hwy I was laughing so hard.


----------



## Solly (5 February 2014)

I wonder how many have read the full statement on the asylum seeker boats issue from Mark Scott and Kate Torney ?

For those interested, it is here.

http://about.abc.net.au/press-releases/abc-statement/

I prefer to critically scrutinise the full text of the actual words published and form my own view, rather than base my opinion on selected excerpts published on main stream media.


----------



## noco (5 February 2014)

The ABC has lots of egg on their faces......They have mellowed including Barrie Cassidy on Insiders.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ased-broadcaster/story-e6frg7bo-1226817953813


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 February 2014)

Solly said:


> I wonder how many have read the full statement on the asylum seeker boats issue from Mark Scott and Kate Torney ?
> 
> For those interested, it is here.
> 
> ...




As we have all done.

And come to our conclusions.

Without assuming others' knowledge or backgrounding.

gg


----------



## Solly (6 February 2014)

*Tony Abbott: sorry seems to be the hardest word for the ABC*

http://gu.com/p/3mf2k/tw by Lenore Taylor @lenoretaylor via @guardian 

There are some interesting views expressed in the comments following the article.


----------



## Solly (6 February 2014)

*TRUTH, TRUST AND TREACHERY*
Media Watch  Episode 01, 3 February 2014 
Video and Transcript

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3937354.htm#

Again with some interest public comment


----------



## Logique (6 February 2014)

Solly said:


> *Tony Abbott: sorry seems to be the hardest word for the ABC*
> 
> http://gu.com/p/3mf2k/tw by Lenore Taylor @lenoretaylor via @guardian
> 
> There are some interesting views expressed in the comments following the article.



  Malcolm Turnbull is the Liberal that Paul Barry voted for in the last election. From the above link: 







> "..Turnbull told Guardian Australia he fully endorsed the assessment of the controversy about the reports by Media Watch host Paul Barry on Monday night, as well as Barry’s conclusion that the ABC should admit a mistake had been made.."


----------



## Solly (6 February 2014)

Logique said:


> Malcolm Turnbull is the Liberal that Paul Barry voted for in the last election. From the above link:




Is Paul Barry biased ? In my view he isn't. My assessment of the asylum seekers report is that the wording was sloppy and tended to give tacit approval to their claims, although in my view the content had merit and warrants further scrutiny.

I've just been sent this article on the event which adds weight that further investigation is warranted.  

*Investigation: 'burned hands' on the high seas *

http://www.smh.com.au/world/investigation-burned-hands-on-the-high-seas-20140206-hvbdl.html

by @mbachelard Indonesia correspondent for Fairfax Media


----------



## Solly (6 February 2014)

*Is the ABC biased and inefficient? Here's what the data says*

http://gu.com/p/3mgxg/tw via @guardian


----------



## drsmith (7 February 2014)

ABC published video of our navy doing a fine job.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaTp2RCOe8I


----------



## IFocus (7 February 2014)

The deionising of Auntie by this bad government is a national disgrace and un-Australian.

Anyone who wants to criticize Australians national icon should leave, its a great organisation full of hard working Australians. 

Just trying to put it all into Abbott speak... I know need to talk more crap to get it right.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> The deionising of Auntie by this bad government is a national disgrace and un-Australian.
> 
> Anyone who wants to criticize Australians national icon should leave, its a great organisation full of hard working Australians.
> 
> Just trying to put it all into Abbott speak... I know need to talk more crap to get it right.




IFocus, it is a left wing organisation, built up over the last 40 years, to employ only those of a similar left mind, and to disseminate left propaganda to Australia.

It is adept at using legalisms and process to avoid change.

It needs an urgent move back to the centre, and it will get it. 

gg


----------



## Solly (7 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> ABC published video of our navy doing a fine job.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaTp2RCOe8I





That is not a Navy vessel towing that craft.


----------



## Julia (7 February 2014)

Solly said:


> That is not a Navy vessel towing that craft.



It has been reported as an Australian Customs vessel.  Are you happy with that description?


----------



## Solly (7 February 2014)

My questions are;

Is the ABC negligent in it's reporting of the alleged asylum seeker on water incident ?

Does this now warrant that the claims need to be tested ?

The view from the government so far has stated that the claims are "unsubstantiated", I have not seen an official denial. Is an official denial in order or is silence appropriate ? 

Does is any corrective action required to be taken against the ABC ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 February 2014)

Solly said:


> My questions are;
> 
> Is the ABC negligent in it's reporting of the alleged asylum seeker on water incident ?
> 
> ...




Engaging with an entity which is more powerful than you and goes against your Australian values is futile.

Such is the ABC.

They will wiggle and worm to ensure their ethic persists, at the expense of the citizen.

The only response is an extra legal one.

It is a very well tested AUSTRALIAN argument which has been taken to the High Court.

It is:

THE VIBE.



gg


----------



## banco (8 February 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> IFocus, it is a left wing organisation, built up over the last 40 years, to employ only those of a similar left mind, and to disseminate left propaganda to Australia.
> 
> It is adept at using legalisms and process to avoid change.
> 
> ...




The Howard Government had such success with changing the culture of the ABC after all.......


----------



## sptrawler (8 February 2014)

banco said:


> The Howard Government had such success with changing the culture of the ABC after all.......




Touche, good point banco, Kerry O'Brien was anti Howard if my memory is correct.

But the fact remains, the ABC should report the news, not project a personal opinion of the news.
It is public funded, to provide an unbiased service.


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2014)

On media coverage of the asylum issue more generally, Greg Sheridan won't be on Laura Tingle's Xmas card list after this,



> By far the most foolish analysis, important only because it is representative, was written by Laura Tingle in The Australian Financial Review. She wrote that: "The Indonesian navy is now not patrolling looking for asylum-seeker boats but for the Australian navy."
> 
> This is completely untrue and was never true at any point.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...f-shadow-boxing/story-e6frgd0x-1226821029415#


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2014)

Solly said:


> My questions are;
> 
> Is the ABC negligent in it's reporting of the alleged asylum seeker on water incident ?
> 
> ...



A spokesman for Bill Shorten had this to say today,



> "Our navy servicemen and women do an outstanding job on the high seas," a spokesperson for Mr Shorten said in a statement to AAP.
> 
> "The opposition has every confidence in the skills and professionalism of our navy."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...use-claims-labor/story-fn3dxiwe-1226821258649

My bolds.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 February 2014)

Quite a good article from Geoffrey Luck which summarises how ordinary Australians "Not Of The Left" are treated when complaining about the ABC.



> How The ABC Gets Away With It
> 
> Complain all you like about the broadcaster's transgressions against fact and impartiality, but it is unlikely to do a scrap of good. While Managing Director Mark Scott embraces semantics, the review process wraps complaints in lawyerly language, obfuscation and interminable delays






> Over three decades the ABC’s complaints system has been successfully entrenched as a policeman investigating the police. The government’s proposed inquiry into the efficiency of the ABC’s operations is an opportunity to cut through the bureaucratic obfuscation that frustrates honest review of complaints. It should recommend what the Hawke government was too timid to do in 1984 – a completely external independent body to receive and handle all complaints about ABC programs.




http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2014/02/abc-gets-away/

gg


----------



## Logique (14 February 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Quite a good article from Geoffrey Luck which summarises how ordinary Australians "Not Of The Left" are treated when complaining about the ABC.
> http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2014/02/abc-gets-away/
> gg





> ...It should recommend what the Hawke government was too timid to do in 1984 – a *completely external independent body* to receive and handle all complaints about ABC programs...



Great idea. Self-regulation hasn't worked, for the reasons outlined.


----------



## Duckman#72 (14 February 2014)

The ABC has its vices, but I do like Gerard Whately calling the AFL.

Carn the Bombers 2014!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Solly (14 February 2014)

Has anyone lodged a complaint to ACMA regarding the matter of an unsatisfactory response from the ABC in regard to an alleged breach of the Act ?

I am eager to scrutinise the ACMA response, if the complainant is willing to share.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 February 2014)

Solly said:


> Has anyone lodged a complaint to ACMA regarding the matter of an unsatisfactory response from the ABC in regard to an alleged breach of the Act ?
> 
> I am eager to scrutinise the ACMA response, if the complainant is willing to share.




This is why I would advise any ASF members to decline Solly's kind invitation. 

It leads to more delays and obfuscation from the ABC. 

It is a bureaucrat's picnic. 

From Gerard Henderson at Media Watch Dog



> STOP PRESS GRAPHIC
> 
> MIKE SMITH DUMPS ON THE ABC
> 
> ...




gg


----------



## drsmith (15 February 2014)

This is a fine example of promoting one side of the argument over the other,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...akarta-summoned-by-indonesian-governm/5261466

Nowhere in that article does it mention that in the 8-weeks since boats have been turned back that none have successfully made it and only 2 IMA's from boats have been accepted, both on medical grounds. 

The best that was said about the success of OSB in that article was the following old news,



> In January, the Government said the number of asylum seekers arriving by boat in Australia had fallen by 80 per cent since Operation Sovereign Borders was introduced four months ago.




The ABC should be presenting the latest information in its news reports. They were at one stage running their own count under the OSB policy. That hasn't been updated since Jan 28.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-25/log-of-boat-arrivals-and-other-asylum-seeker-incidents/5014496


----------



## sptrawler (15 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> This is a fine example of promoting one side of the argument over the other,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-...akarta-summoned-by-indonesian-governm/5261466
> 
> ...




So Indonesia is going to bring the issue up with a the U.S a country that has a barbed wire fence along it's border.
Best of luck with that


----------



## drsmith (15 February 2014)

sptrawler said:


> So Indonesia is going to bring the issue up with a the U.S a country that has a barbed wire fence along it's border.
> Best of luck with that



It's just bluster for domestic political purposes.

If no boats are leaving Indonesia, they won't be sent back.


----------



## rumpole (17 February 2014)

I haven't read this entire thread , have just come back from holidays and I'm pretty sure I know what the opinion here is.

I just point out the following survey

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/22/our-trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-as-commercial-media-struggle/

_"Our commercial media have struggled to regain trust with Australians, while the ABC remains far ahead."
_

Very few people trust Rupert it seems


----------



## IFocus (17 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> I haven't read this entire thread , have just come back from holidays and I'm pretty sure I know what the opinion here is.
> 
> I just point out the following survey
> 
> ...





Trust is not rated here just blind obedience to the conservative view of the world or else its bias.


----------



## rumpole (17 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> Trust is not rated here just blind obedience to the conservative view of the world or else its bias.




I think you may be on to something there


----------



## trainspotter (17 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> Trust is not rated here just blind obedience to the conservative view of the world or else its bias.








Just drink the Kool Aid IFocus


----------



## IFocus (17 February 2014)

trainspotter said:


> View attachment 56843
> 
> 
> Just drink the Kool Aid IFocus




LOL yeah looking forward to a Bintang come May


----------



## drsmith (18 February 2014)

An interesting contrast between an ABC Insiders interview of Chris Bowen as immigration minister in 2012 and Scott Morrison last weekend.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jLXt7m1abE


----------



## trainspotter (18 February 2014)

IFocus said:


> LOL yeah looking forward to a Bintang come May




Boleh saya minta satu dingin bir Bintang ... cepat cepat!

Some of Rupert Murdoch's tweets prior to the election.

This is a little of what he thought. 5 February 2012: “Don’t understand Aussie politics. Can Kevin Rudd really come back and knife Gillard? Weird place mucking up great future.” Followed by: “Gillard once good education minister, now prisoner of minority & Greenies. Rudd still delusional who nobody could work with. Nobody else?” 24 February 2012: “Oz Labor tearing themselves to pieces. Ugly sight. Tony Abbott should just lie low and watch.” 17 May 2013: *“Australia itself makes no carbon problem. China does, but what can we do other than meaningless gestures costly to every home?”* 26 June 2013: “Australian public now totally disgusted with Labor Party wrecking country with it’s [sic] sordid intrigues.” 19 August 2013: “Conviction politicians hard to find anywhere. Australia’s Tony Abbott a rare exception. Opponent Rudd all over the place convincing nobody.” 7 September 2013: “Aust election public sick of public sector workers and phony welfare scroungers sucking life out of economy.” 19 September 2013: “Great first day by PM Abbott firing top bureaucrats, merging departments and killing carbon tax."

Tell it like it is Rupert. So when Julia Gillard threatened to reform the media in Australia cause she was getting slammed in the tabloids leading up to the election this was OK?



> Prime Minister Julia Gillard over the last few days has gone on a full frontal attack on the Australian Media which undermines free speech in this country. Her motive is to cover-up her own corrupt past. Julie Gillard has personally phoned executives and editors at News Ltd and highly likely Fairfax Media to stop reporting on her past of helping her former boyfriend Bruce Wilson rip off the AWU of over $1,000,000. It makes one wonder if she has also phoned other media as well in her cover-up attempt.




http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...past-the-fairfax-media-and-news-corp-scandal/

But when the ABC incorrectly reports that torture of asylum seekers by our own Navy was incorrect and Mr Scott refuses to apologise then this is not OK?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/abc-admits-torture-reports-error/story-e6frg996-1226817964071#

Kettle black anyone?


----------



## noco (18 February 2014)

drsmith said:


> An interesting contrast between an ABC Insiders interview of Chris Bowen as immigration minister in 2012 and Scott Morrison last weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jLXt7m1abE





Yes Doc....it goes to prove how biased the ABC is towards the Labor Party.

It is called manipulation.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 February 2014)

Got the Herald Sun delivered instead of the Age I subscribe to today.
Besides lacking content. page 3 is all about how many drivers have been booked for slow driving this past year.
Page 4 is a traditional attack on the ABC. I think they have a reporter whose only duty is to find ways to attack the ABC and Fairfax. 
Get to page 6 and finally the Alcoa shutdown finally makes the news. Of course their article is in baby English and the special comment section blames the GFC when it has much more to do with the rise of energy due to the failed privatisation of our electrical assets.

It is just propaganda. 

As in the survey Rumpole pointed out a few posts up, people don't trust Newscorp, even the ones who regularly read it.
You would need to be mildly retarded to believe what you read in this "news"paper.


----------



## Julia (19 February 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Got the Herald Sun delivered instead of the Age I subscribe to today.
> Besides lacking content. page 3 is all about how many drivers have been booked for slow driving this past year.
> Page 4 is a traditional attack on the ABC. I think they have a reporter whose only duty is to find ways to attack the ABC and Fairfax.
> Get to page 6 and finally the Alcoa shutdown finally makes the news. Of course their article is in baby English and the special comment section blames the GFC when it has much more to do with the rise of energy due to the failed privatisation of our electrical assets.
> ...



I don't think you should judge all News Ltd publications by the Herald Sun.  I've never read it but gather it's of similar standard to the Courier Mail, the tabloid publication in Qld.  It's rubbish.

But "The Australian" is an entirely different matter imo.  
There's no doubt, however, that it does have a Right bias, just as Fairfax and the ABC lean Left.
That's OK for both the privately owned companies but not OK for a publicly funded organisation charged with presenting unbiased material.


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

Julia said:


> There's no doubt, however, that it does have a Right bias, just as Fairfax and the ABC lean Left.
> That's OK for both the privately owned companies but not OK for a publicly funded organisation charged with presenting unbiased material.




Who do you trust more , Murdoch or the ABC ?

According to the survey I have previously referred to, the ABC is trusted by many more people (which obviously includes Liberal voters) than the commercial media.

Please get over this supposed "Left bias" of the ABC. Did you know its managing director once worked for the NSW Liberals ?

So Barry Cassidy once worked for Bob Hawke, big deal. Press secretaries are like lawyers, they work for whoever pays them . I'm sure you will find people at the ABC who worked for many parties or candidates. It means nothing.

And even if the ABC does "lean Left", which I don't believe anyway, that just balances out the overwhelming list to the Right of the commercial media. The ABC has a duty to provide a balance overall, and do things that the commercial media doesn't. That's why you have shows like 4 Corners. They have blown the gaff on Labor and Liberals alike.

If your views are to the Right, a Centre position seems Left to you. Your perception of media bias is determined by your own bias. Only when your own views are unbiased can you make a judgement on others.


----------



## trainspotter (19 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> And even if the ABC does "lean Left", which I don't believe anyway, that just balances out the overwhelming list to the Right of the commercial media. The ABC has a duty to provide a balance overall, and do things that the commercial media doesn't. That's why you have shows like 4 Corners. They have blown the gaff on Labor and Liberals alike.
> 
> If your views are to the Right, a Centre position seems Left to you. Your perception of media bias is determined by your own bias. Only when your own views are unbiased can you make a judgement on others.




I know you have just come back from holidays rumpole but if you read post #978 of this thread you will see that journalists are nothing but unionised, pinko, snouts in the trough, left wing, card carrying commies who all work for the ABC.


----------



## rumpole (19 February 2014)

trainspotter said:


> I know you have just come back from holidays rumpole but if you read post #978 of this thread you will see that journalists are nothing but unionised, pinko, snouts in the trough, left wing, card carrying commies who all work for the ABC.




That's good to hear. There is some hope for the country still


----------



## Julia (19 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> Who do you trust more , Murdoch or the ABC ?



Why should I feel obliged to choose?  I have no overall trust in any media any more than I do in any politician.
Just not interested in pursuing an endless argument.



> According to the survey I have previously referred to, the ABC is trusted by many more people (which obviously includes Liberal voters) than the commercial media.



It would depend on the make up of the voters in the survey.  I  have not seen the methodology.  There are frequently such surveys  for various organisations which will, of course, be completed by those already devoted to the line pursued by that media organisation.  



> Please get over this supposed "Left bias" of the ABC.



What?   I feel quite able to make my own assessment, thanks.   Don't need instructions from you.


----------



## wayneL (20 February 2014)

Julia said:


> Why should I feel obliged to choose?  I have no overall trust in any media any more than I do in any politician.
> Just not interested in pursuing an endless argument.
> 
> 
> ...



I agree with Julia's comments.

However since this latest pubic discussion on ABC bias, I have noticed far more balance on News Radio. In that environment it is far easier to be objective about both sides; media bias arouses tribal instincts that only polarize the listener IMO.

As far as the commercial media, they have a profit imperative and one agenda or another, I don't expect them to be balanced.


----------



## rumpole (20 February 2014)

wayneL said:


> As far as the commercial media, they have a profit imperative and one agenda or another, I don't expect them to be balanced.




The commercial media's agenda is simply to increase it's profits and will support the party it thinks is most conducive to those ends, regardless of whether it's in the public interest.


----------



## wayneL (20 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> The commercial media's agenda is simply to increase it's profits and will support the party it thinks is most conducive to those ends, regardless of whether it's in the public interest.




Isn't that what I said?


----------



## rumpole (20 February 2014)

wayneL said:


> Isn't that what I said?




I thought you might be delighted to know someone agrees with you


----------



## wayneL (20 February 2014)

rumpole said:


> I thought you might be delighted to know someone agrees with you




It depends, there are many people for which I would find that disconcerting. ;-)


----------



## drsmith (2 March 2014)

Interesting start to Insiders today in relation to their poster boy and Stephen Conroy.

Either the latter is dead frontbencher walking or Bill Shorten is dead Opposition Leader walking.


----------



## noco (2 March 2014)

drsmith said:


> Interesting start to Insiders today in relation to their poster boy and Stephen Conroy.
> 
> Either the latter is dead frontbencher walking or Bill Shorten is dead Opposition Leader walking.




Yes Doc, I watched it also....I could not believe how Cassidy has mellowed away from his strong political bias....even that commo David Marr had very little resistance to the topic.


----------



## banco (2 March 2014)

Julia said:


> There's no doubt, however, that it does have a Right bias, just as Fairfax and the ABC lean Left.
> That's OK for both the privately owned companies but not OK for a publicly funded organisation charged with presenting unbiased material.




I'd prefer the ABC continue leaning to the left rather than sucking the life out of the material by trying to make every story as even handed (and inevitably boring) as possible.


----------



## Logique (2 March 2014)

drsmith said:


> Interesting start to Insiders today in relation to their poster boy and Stephen Conroy.
> 
> Either the latter is dead frontbencher walking or Bill Shorten is dead Opposition Leader walking.



Bolt is back and will clobber the Insiders in the ratings Dr. This morning the BR neatly skewered Labor on the leadership issue.


----------



## rumpole (2 March 2014)

Logique said:


> Bolt is back and will clobber the Insiders in the ratings Dr. This morning the BR neatly skewered Labor on the leadership issue.




3 months after an election, who gives a frog's freckle ?


----------



## Julia (2 March 2014)

Logique said:


> Bolt is back and will clobber the Insiders in the ratings Dr. This morning the BR neatly skewered Labor on the leadership issue.



I've tried to like The Bolt Report.  It gets right offside with me immediately with that violent red background.
And then Andrew Bolt's remarks are so predictable.
Neither does Mr Abbott do himself any favours in the overall electorate by always being available to such as Bolt and the ghastly Hadley and Jones shows, whilst being reluctant to appear on the ABC.

However, it was really good to see Peter Costello in fine form.  Reminds us of what we missed due to his timidity.


----------



## AAA (2 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> 3 months after an election, who gives a frog's freckle ?




You are right. It doesn't matter at the moment. What would be interesting is if Labor had a leadership problem in an election year. What if Shorten runs into trouble from the union inquiry. What happens if there is a challenge. If I was Tony Abbott I would be tempted to call an election whilst Labor are going through their cumbersome leadership election. For a large part of the campaign the Labor leader would not be known. It would not be a good look. It would be labor saying, " We are ready to govern but we are not sure who should be PM. 

Kevin Rudd. The gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## noco (3 March 2014)

Julia said:


> I've tried to like The Bolt Report.  It gets right offside with me immediately with that violent red background.
> And then Andrew Bolt's remarks are so predictable.
> Neither does Mr Abbott do himself any favours in the overall electorate by always being available to such as Bolt and the ghastly Hadley and Jones shows, whilst being reluctant to appear on the ABC.
> 
> However, it was really good to see Peter Costello in fine form.  Reminds us of what we missed due to his timidity.




Abbott won't go on the ABC Insiders because of the blatant bias expressed by Barry Cassidy but I have seen him on the 7.30 report and the 10.30 late line. On the other hand Shorten has no hesitation in appearing on Insiders.

It is a bit like trying to get Shorten on the Bolt Report.

But Julia do not let us forget the ABC is Government funded and it's charter is be unbiased but as we all know the ABC is stacked with  Labor Party lackeys resulting in the manner in which it presents itself. The ABC is currently engaging some bod $600 per hour to give them a new image.

On the other hand, the Bolt Report is supported by an independent organisation and I guess has the liberty to report as it chooses.


----------



## rumpole (3 March 2014)

noco said:


> But Julia do not let us forget the ABC is Government funded and it's charter is be unbiased but as we all know the ABC is stacked with  Labor Party lackeys resulting in the manner in which it presents itself.
> 
> .




Of course, the CEO of the ABC, Mark Scott is a Liberal lackey but you don't mention that.


----------



## noco (3 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> Of course, the CEO of the ABC, Mark Scott is a Liberal lackey but you don't mention that.




So if Mark Scott is a Liberal lackey, why can't he control those biased Labor lackeys.....You cannot deny it is not happening.


----------



## rumpole (3 March 2014)

noco said:


> So if Mark Scott is a Liberal lackey, why can't he control those biased Labor lackeys.....You cannot deny it is not happening.




What is not happening ? Give a few examples.


----------



## orr (3 March 2014)

noco said:


> On the other hand, the Bolt Report is supported by an independent organisation and I guess has the liberty to report as it chooses.




Tom Lehrer concluded satire was obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Price, good to see your still making the attempt though noco.


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2014)

I was just watching Shaun Micallef's " Mad as Hell" on ABC.
Very bold. 
I hope their comedy skits of Labor, when in office, were of a similar flavour.

The ABC, seems to be playing a very dangerous game. IMO

Playing favourites, doesn't seem right, for a public funded company.

But hey, maybe they are working to a plan, best of luck with that.lol


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2014)

What a great night, watched Lateline, Julie Bishop got a grilling. 
She gave a terrific performance, the commentator jumped, with scripted questions from, Indonesia, Russia, to Fiji.
The only fault I saw was Bishop didn't pursue the reporter, over the spy claim, she made mention it was under Labors watch.
But she could have chased him around with the question, if she was as single minded as him.lol
He had a script and still couldn't trip her up.

Hope she really gets into him next time.


----------



## Julia (7 March 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Hope she really gets into him next time.



I think she does herself more good maintaining the pleasant, cool, assured (even faintly amused?) demeanour.


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2014)

Julia said:


> I think she does herself more good maintaining the pleasant, cool, assured (even faintly amused?) demeanour.




Yes, she certainly appeared to be well informed on her portfolio. Very confident and composed.


----------



## trainspotter (7 March 2014)

I note the ABC has toned down the vitriol of late? Was expecting a major lambasting on the Manus Island riot fiasco. Seems like they are sticking to the facts and not opining their own Lefty views ...... anyone agree?


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2014)

trainspotter said:


> I note the ABC has toned down the vitriol of late? Was expecting a major lambasting on the Manus Island riot fiasco. Seems like they are sticking to the facts and not opining their own Lefty views ...... anyone agree?




Yep noticed new radio has been more balanced of late... Only noticed one single 'the labor party is our team' in the last few weeks.


----------



## trainspotter (7 March 2014)

Could it be that the Libertarians who have threatened to rattle their cage may have declawed them?


----------



## noco (7 March 2014)

trainspotter said:


> Could it be that the Libertarians who have threatened to rattle their cage may have declawed them?




I would say so......shape up or ship out......I am sure that is the message they would have received from Turnbull.


----------



## Julia (7 March 2014)

trainspotter said:


> I note the ABC has toned down the vitriol of late? Was expecting a major lambasting on the Manus Island riot fiasco. Seems like they are sticking to the facts and not opining their own Lefty views ...... anyone agree?



Definitely.  Right across the ABC.  My pet peeve, Tony Delroy's "Nightlife"  has demonstrated a considerable about face on quite a few occasions, actually sticking up for the government!!


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

noco said:


> I would say so......shape up or ship out......I am sure that is the message they would have received from Turnbull.




So you think it's appropriate for a government to pressure a broadcaster ?

You would be the first to complain if the Labor party did the same thing.


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

Julia said:


> Definitely.  Right across the ABC.  My pet peeve, Tony Delroy's "Nightlife"  has demonstrated a considerable about face on quite a few occasions, actually sticking up for the government!!




What a shame there is nothing worth listening to on commercial radio if you are "right across the ABC".


----------



## AAA (7 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> So you think it's appropriate for a government to pressure a broadcaster ?
> 
> You would be the first to complain if the Labor party did the same thing.




I don't think there is anything wrong with the government expecting a public funded broadcaster to report news accurately and without bias.


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

AAA said:


> I don't think there is anything wrong with the government expecting a public funded broadcaster to report news accurately and without bias.




Neither do I, but bias is in the mind of the observer.


----------



## noco (7 March 2014)

AAA said:


> I don't think there is anything wrong with the government expecting a public funded broadcaster to report news accurately and without bias.





+ 1.....I believe it is in their charter......Even Barrie Cassidy on Insiders has pulled his horns in......nothing like a level playing field.


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

noco said:


> + 1.....I believe it is in their charter......Even Barrie Cassidy on Insiders has pulled his horns in......nothing like a level playing field.




The ABC is in survival mode at the moment, but closer to the next election they will revert back to their Communist roots and rip the heart out of the LNP.


----------



## trainspotter (7 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> So you think it's appropriate for a government to pressure a broadcaster ?
> 
> You would be the first to complain if the Labor party did the same thing.




So when Julia Gillard proposed media law reform (read proposed government-appointed regulator whose decisions could not be appealed) were being introduced to parliament ......... you fill in the gaps


----------



## IFocus (7 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> So you think it's appropriate for a government to pressure a broadcaster ?




Absolutely how can conservatives rewrite history if the ABC is not on side. 

My god how could anyone believe that the carbon tax is not responsible for the demise of car manufacturing, Qantas, rampant union demands, Tasmania Forests, age of entitlement (except mums earning over $75k) etc is disgusting.

The ABC not broadcasting this repeatedly using a complete dill with a self serving smirk  is an offence to our national pride.


----------



## Julia (7 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> What a shame there is nothing worth listening to on commercial radio if you are "right across the ABC".



You have misinterpreted what I said.
"Right across the ABC" was my observation of the change in tone throughout the radio networks and TV programs.
I have no idea why you would interpret that as my suggesting that I am - in some very clever and superior sense - completely across the ABC, such a suggestion having nothing to do with the point at issue.

In a regional area I cannot begin to describe the absolute awfulness of local commercial radio stations so I have the ABC or nothing.


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

Julia said:


> You have misinterpreted what I said.
> "Right across the ABC" was my observation of the change in tone throughout the radio networks and TV programs.
> I have no idea why you would interpret that as my suggesting that I am - in some very clever and superior sense - completely across the ABC, such a suggestion having nothing to do with the point at issue.




It was a joke, but if you have to explain jokes, there is no point explaining.



> In a regional area I cannot begin to describe the absolute awfulness of local commercial radio stations so I have the ABC or nothing.





I'm in a regional area too, the only exposure I get to local commercial radio is at the supermarket. 

Today I was gleefully informed multiple times of the local bogan motorsport day at Bathurst with the 'burnout' competition the highlight of the day.

That's typical of the degree of intellectual discussion in this area.


----------



## wayneL (7 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> I'm in a regional area too, the only exposure I get to local commercial radio is at the supermarket.
> 
> Today I was gleefully informed multiple times of the local bogan motorsport day at Bathurst with the 'burnout' competition the highlight of the day.
> 
> That's typical of the degree of intellectual discussion in this area.




Labor seat is it?


----------



## rumpole (7 March 2014)

wayneL said:


> Labor seat is it?




Dumb ass Nationals.

Although we did have a Period of Light when Peter Andren was alive, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Nationals poisoned his coffee.


----------



## Calliope (8 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> That's typical of the degree of intellectual discussion in this area.




If it's "intellectual discussion" you crave, i.e. from people who are in sync with you, read the Green Left Weekly.



> Green Left Weekly is an Australian socialist newspaper, written by progressive activists to "present the views excluded by the big business media".


----------



## rumpole (8 March 2014)

Calliope said:


> If it's "intellectual discussion" you crave, i.e. from people who are in sync with you, read the Green Left Weekly.




Pity you always think in extremes. It's either your far Right view or a far Left view, nothing in between.


----------



## Calliope (8 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> Pity you always think in extremes. It's either your far Right view or a far Left view, nothing in between.





For more "intellectual discussion" try this from the Book Club on ABC 1.


----------



## trainspotter (8 March 2014)

Rumpole of the Bailey ... if it is intellectual conversation you are after then you are living in Bathurst country. I can smell the rubber burning from here.

If intellegentia discourse is what you are after than I suggest you join a book club .... ABC has a good one :


----------



## noco (10 March 2014)

Why does Mark Scott, the head of the ABC need to engage a guy named Andrew Butcher at $600 per hour to tell him how to improve the ABC image.......What is this wanker being paid to do?....he should resign....he does not even know the views of his presenters.......he obviously has lost control of the ABC.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...mments/rowan_deans_free_advice_to_mark_scott/


----------



## rumpole (10 March 2014)

noco said:


> Why does Mark Scott, the head of the ABC need to engage a guy named Andrew Butcher at $600 per hour to tell him how to improve the ABC image.......What is this wanker being paid to do?....he should resign....he does not even know the views of his presenters.......he obviously has lost control of the ABC.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...mments/rowan_deans_free_advice_to_mark_scott/




Another rant by Bolt


----------



## noco (10 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> Another rant by Bolt




rumpole, I don't see you denying the true facts......it was Rowan Dean who made the remarks not Andrew Bolt.

You seem to have it is for Bolt.....is it because he he is not a left wing socialist comrade of the Labor Party?


----------



## rumpole (10 March 2014)

noco said:


> You seem to have it is for Bolt.....is it because he he is not a left wing socialist comrade of the Labor Party?




No more than you have it in for anyone Left of Ghengis Khan


----------



## sptrawler (10 March 2014)

Imo and I repeat,IMO, when I heard the money a lady presenter on a morning breakfast show was on. I gagged. No wonder Australia is in for a reality check.
Why would a t.v presenter be on $700k a year, also I would assume that is ball park, for most presenters.

So I suppose we shouldn't jump all over fifo people doing 4/1 earning $160k.


----------



## Julia (10 March 2014)

This thread has been largely about the ABC's bias to the Left in a political sense.  Amongst the comments have been screams for the ABC to be abolished because of this bias.

But let's remember that the ABC has produced much valuable social commentary, an excellent example of which is tonight's "Four Corners" on the hideous abuse perpetrated on a little child, apparently adopted as a baby just for this purpose.  The program laid out the grooming process exhibited by the male homosexual parents (I'm resisting the temptation to put 'parents' in quotes because surely we have the concept of parents having as their prime motivation in raising a child the best possible life and outcomes for that child.)

After inflicting gross abuse by predators world wide on this poor child, and thanks to dedicated police investigations globally, these vile adopters of the child were apprehended, tried and sentenced.

The background of one of them, investigated by the Four Corners team, showed that the childhood of this man reflected the very similar abuse he went on to perpetrate against the adoptee.
Does this excuse his behaviour?  Of course not.  But it does perhaps allow us to begin to understand that such immense damage to a young child is likely to have vast repercussions in later life.

Any chance that any commercial media organisation could have put together such an intelligent, searching and sensitive program?  I doubt it very much and have never seen any evidence in such as the odious "60 Minutes" tabloid style.

So, when we're railing against the ABC, let's perhaps pause to consider so much that they do so well.


----------



## sptrawler (10 March 2014)

Absolutely Julia and I think that is what they do best, also i feel that is what taxpayers want them to do with their money.
Not take a political stance for the LNP or Labor or the Greens.
If they can get back to unbiased political reporting and focus on high quality content, they won't go the way of Holden and Ford.IMO


----------



## Calliope (10 March 2014)

Julia said:


> So, when we're railing against the ABC, let's perhaps pause to consider so much that they do so well.




Yes...like the Book Club.


----------



## rumpole (11 March 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Not take a political stance for the LNP or Labor or the Greens.




I've yet to see concrete examples of where and how they do this.

Airing the views of all political parties is not bias, it's simply the job of all media to be fair and unbiased and give the public exposure to all views so they can make informed decisions.


----------



## rumpole (12 March 2014)

ABC bias claims: Independent audit finds four of 97 stories raised concern

Posted 19 minutes ago
Map: Australia

An independent audit of the ABC's coverage in regards to asylum seekers has found four out of 97 pieces of content which were reviewed raised editorial concerns.

The audit of 51 7.30 stories and 46 Lateline stories was undertaken by journalist Gerald Stone.

Stone found that overall coverage on Lateline and 7.30 included a wide range of opinions and was given appropriate air time.

A separate audit of ABC radio coverage of the 2013 federal election campaign found no evidence of bias.

ABC chairman James Spigelman welcomed Stone's findings, saying the criticisms have received "proper consideration".

"These reviews have once again demonstrated that against the background of thousands of stories produced over the period reviewed, the error rate is small," he said in a statement.

"Nevertheless, the ABC board is determined to ensure that informed criticisms are taken seriously, reflected upon and openly acknowledged.

"The criticisms have been accepted and acted upon. No further steps, with respect to the individual journalists, are required."

Mr Spigelman says the ABC's guidelines on impartiality will be expanded and updated, accompanied with "ongoing training and editorial discussion".

"Specifically, the review of guidelines will address the risks arising if questions are not asked, allegations and claims are not closely scrutinised or the evidence that they have been is not broadcast," he said.

"This reflects the principle thrust of the Stone critique."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-12/bias-review-finds-4pc-of-abc-content-raised-concern/5315656
==============================================================================

4 out of 97 is pretty good IMO.

I wonder if any commercial media is even willing to subject themselves to an independent editorial review ?


----------



## banco (12 March 2014)

What the ABC pretends not to realise is that while some individual stories are presented in a biased fashion the chief source of their bias lies in the story selection and emphasis ie if an NGO criticises Australia's detention centers they will give it a lot of prominence.


----------



## DocK (12 March 2014)

banco said:


> What the ABC pretends not to realise is that while some individual stories are presented in a biased fashion the chief source of their bias lies in the story selection and emphasis ie if an NGO criticises Australia's detention centers they will give it a lot of prominence.




The tone and expression used by the presenter also plays a large part.  

Even Tony Jones had to sheepishly laugh at the end of this week's Q&A when someone raised the question of the ABC wasting so much money using a 9 member legal team to defend a totally outrageous slander of a journalist by the Chasers (who else?).  Every member of the panel was united in their opinion that the ABC should have offered an apology when it was first demanded, instead of wasting taxpayer funds on a drawn out legal stoush.  They need to be mindful of where their funding comes from imo.


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2014)

DocK said:


> The tone and expression used by the presenter also plays a large part.
> 
> .




I agree, watching ABC produced 'comedy' they seem to focus on Abbott, who the majority voted for.

I think they would get a lot more laughs focusing on the Labor Party, Shorten and Albanese are a natural comedy skit.IMO

Also the majority of taxpayers would obviously agree.


----------



## rumpole (12 March 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I agree, watching ABC produced 'comedy' they seem to focus on Abbott, who the majority voted for.
> 
> I think they would get a lot more laughs focusing on the Labor Party, Shorten and Albanese are a natural comedy skit.IMO
> 
> Also the majority of taxpayers would obviously agree.




I don't. I think they should make a satire "At Home with Tony".

It would only be fair and unbiased wouldn't you agree ?

Although probably the most boring show ever made.

But you would have all the conservatives yelling *LEFTY BIAS *and threatening to close the ABC.


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> I don't. I think they should make a satire "At Home with Tony".
> 
> It would only be fair and unbiased wouldn't you agree ?
> 
> Although probably the most boring show ever made.




You're probably right there, it would be boring, carrying out the P.M's duties and keeping fit for triathalons.

He probably goes from parliament to the gym or a run or circuit training, then one assumes off to bed.

How do you think most other politicians would compare?

Probably a day in the life of Craig Thomson, would be better t.v.lol

Yep Tony's boring, but it seems he is clean living and doesn't have many skeletons in the closet.

It's a shame Australians don't see that as an admirable trait.

They seem to see it as a quality to make fun of and criticise, probably indicates an inferiority complex.

A bit like at Uni, where all the Asians are on the computer terminals in the library and the Aussies are in the student union bar.
Aussie, aussie, aussie, oy oy oy.lol


----------



## banco (12 March 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I agree, watching ABC produced 'comedy' they seem to focus on Abbott, who the majority voted for.
> 
> I think they would get a lot more laughs focusing on the Labor Party, Shorten and Albanese are a natural comedy skit.IMO
> 
> Also the majority of taxpayers would obviously agree.




Well people with conservative leanings are generally no good at comedy.  There are libertarian comics but you can count decent socially conservative comedians on one hand.


----------



## Julia (12 March 2014)

banco said:


> What the ABC pretends not to realise is that while some individual stories are presented in a biased fashion the chief source of their bias lies in the story selection and emphasis ie if an NGO criticises Australia's detention centers they will give it a lot of prominence.



Agree.  This was actually briefly covered in a self-congratulatory segment on ABC Radio's "PM" this evening when host Mark Colvin ' interviewed' Mr Spigelman, Chairman of the ABC, about the report:
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2014/s3961952.htm
in which they generously agreed that the stories covered by the ABC may not be those of interest to the majority of listeners.  Gay marriage was quoted as an example.  
Let's wait and see if they actually reduce their devoted coverage of this, climate change and other Left agenda.  I won't be holding my breath.



DocK said:


> The tone and expression used by the presenter also plays a large part.



Yes, exactly.   This is hard to pin down in terms of lodging a complaint.  It's possible to convey a huge amount by simply going "uh, huh" in response to some outrageous assertion by a caller.


----------



## rumpole (13 March 2014)

> Let's wait and see if they actually reduce their devoted coverage of this[gay marriage] , climate change and other Left agenda. I won't be holding my breath.




I've heard little about gay marriage on mainstream ABC lately (fortunately)

As for climate change, it's been acknowledged around the world that AGW is a real phenomena, the problem being that no one wants to do anything about it. If it's not real, why are the Libs proposing "Direct Action" against nothing ?

But, as to ABC coverage, as I've said before IT'S THEIR JOB to cover the ongoing debates of all issues in the public domain.

 Just because you are not interested in an issue don't expect them not to cover it. You have the choice not to listen.


----------



## rumpole (13 March 2014)

An appalling case of Pro Lefty ABC bias

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-13/green-the-real-politics-of-the-possible/5316292


----------



## banco (13 March 2014)

Julia said:


> Agree.  This was actually briefly covered in a self-congratulatory segment on ABC Radio's "PM" this evening when host Mark Colvin ' interviewed' Mr Spigelman, Chairman of the ABC, about the report:
> http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2014/s3961952.htm
> in which they generously agreed that the stories covered by the ABC may not be those of interest to the majority of listeners.  Gay marriage was quoted as an example.
> Let's wait and see if they actually reduce their devoted coverage of this, climate change and other Left agenda.  I won't be holding my breath.




I was interested to see on ABC's four corners (which was about a particularly heinous pedophile couple) that the couple had previously been featured (obviously before the pedophile allegations) on ABC radio in a feel good story about how great gay dads are.


----------



## Julia (13 March 2014)

banco said:


> I was interested to see on ABC's four corners (which was about a particularly heinous pedophile couple) that the couple had previously been featured (obviously before the pedophile allegations) on ABC radio in a feel good story about how great gay dads are.



Thanks for that, banco.  While watching this week's 4 Corners I had the strong sense of having seen such a program a few years ago, but thought I must have been mistaken.


----------



## rumpole (14 March 2014)

banco said:


> I was interested to see on ABC's four corners (which was about a particularly heinous pedophile couple) that the couple had previously been featured (obviously before the pedophile allegations) on ABC radio in a feel good story about how great gay dads are.




That's true, and the reporter later wrote a piece about how fooled she was by the two men.

Should she have taken a more sceptical approach in the first place ? It's hard to say if all seemed well at the time, but the whole concept of buying children overseas stinks to me, no matter who does it, and the child trafficking aspect seems to have been ignored in the original report  in favour of a PC approach to same sex parenting.

This is the journalists retraction of her story.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-10/gorman-second-thoughts/4809582


----------



## drsmith (14 March 2014)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfawLTmKZNo


----------



## banco (14 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> That's true, and the reporter later wrote a piece about how fooled she was by the two men.
> 
> Should she have taken a more sceptical approach in the first place ? It's hard to say if all seemed well at the time, but the whole concept of buying children overseas stinks to me, no matter who does it, and the child trafficking aspect seems to have been ignored in the original report  in favour of a PC approach to same sex parenting.
> 
> ...




I think you are missing the point.  I have no problem with the original story as a piece of journalism (how was she to know?) but can you see the commercial stations deciding to do a feel good story on gay parents? It's about the number of stories ABC runs on certain issues (gay parenting, gay marriage etc.). I must have heard at least half a dozen stories about gay rights in Russia in the past few months on the ABC.

Funnily enough if you read her second throughts article she doesn't even pretend she doesn't have an agenda:

"_Sure, life had thrown me a few curve balls. But I'd never been routinely discriminated against. The people I know who are gay are not treated the same as everyone else. They are not equal. That's not just my opinion.

There's evidence that if you are gay, bisexual or transgender it can be a tough journey. You are more likely to have physical and mental health problems. You are more likely to have depression, experience violence, be homeless, take drugs and have suicidal thoughts.

The more I researched, the more compelled I was to cover the issue. This struck me as a significant opportunity to explore diversity in our community and hear the voices of those who usually aren't heard. While we don't always get it right at the ABC, we try to reflect a complex, changing society with many faces._"


----------



## rumpole (14 March 2014)

banco said:


> While we don't always get it right at the ABC, we try to reflect a complex, changing society with many faces.[/I]"




That's what they should be doing, but yes they can push too far.

 There is a difference whether the stories are print or broadcast, in print you can just go on to the next story, but broadcasting takes up time that could be used on stories with broader interest.

IMO the ABC overdid the gay marriage debate on the station I watch most, ABCNews24. I hope they have had enough of it for a while, I certainly have.


----------



## sptrawler (15 March 2014)

Actually the ABC is probably no different to any other station, regarding their bias.

That is why the PVR has become so important.

You can tape all the shows you want to watch. 

Then watch them, when the crap is being shown on the pleb t.v.


----------



## DocK (15 March 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Actually the ABC is probably no different to any other station, regarding their bias.
> 
> That is why the PVR has become so important.
> 
> ...




I have one word for you sptrawler - Foxtel.


----------



## rumpole (15 March 2014)

DocK said:


> I have one word for you sptrawler - Foxtel.




Yes, Foxtel is quite good. It's box has a built in PVR which you can program over the Internet to record .

 All free to air channels plus the Foxtel stations can be accessed and recorded.


----------



## Julia (15 March 2014)

That's fine if you're a TV watcher.  I'm not with the exception of a very few programs.
Much prefer radio and in a regional area - unless you are fascinated by advertisements for local lawn mowing businesses etc - it's the ABC only.


----------



## IFocus (15 March 2014)

A lovely piece written by Mike calton

In dogged pursuit of a mongrel act



> The Tories and their army of media toadies wage their war on the ABC with increasing fury, sniping here, a charge from the big battalions there.
> 
> Whimpering in the trenches is one Chris Kenny, once a factotum to Lord Downer at the peak of his global glory, now a minor columnist for The Australian and a hugely unwatched talking head for Sky News. As he tells anyone who'll listen, he is much insulted by a Chaser comedy sketch on ABC TV last September which showed him Photo-shopped, pants down, apparently in carnal congress with a canine.
> 
> The party line pumped out from the News Corpse fortress in Surry Hills is that "the highly respected" Kenny would have settled for a simple apology. But the Green-Left ideologues at the ABC arrogantly spurned his approaches, forcing him to sue for defamation.





> This is economical with the truth. I have it on good authority that a month ago Kenny's lawyers fired off a letter to the ABC – without prejudice, blah blah – demanding:
> Advertisement
> 
> 1) $95,000 in cash.
> ...





And this



> Kenny's behaviour is pathetic. There is an ancient convention that if you have your own media outlet, you don't sue. You are able to hit back. But this is typical of the ratbag right, which dishes it out but can't take it. Clamouring for attention, he bathes in the warm glow of wounded amour propre.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/in-dogged-pursuit-of-a-mongrel-act-20140314-34s7s.html#ixzz2vzcVH0f3


----------



## rumpole (15 March 2014)

IFocus said:


> A lovely piece written by Mike calton
> 
> In dogged pursuit of a mongrel act
> 
> ...




Good old Mike.

One of the best


----------



## Calliope (15 March 2014)

IFocus said:


> A lovely piece written by Mike calton
> In dogged pursuit of a mongrel act




And endorsed by Rumpole *of course*;



> Good old Mike.
> 
> One of the best




Well they would love Carlton...wouldn't they? He is probably the most foul-mouthed leftist scumbag on the Fairfax payroll.


----------



## Julia (15 March 2014)

When overwhelmed by the Left political content on ABC Radio National and the Local Radio network, I seek refuge in Classic FM.  So it was this evening.

Lo, I'm regaled with a musical (?) version of Julia Gillard's infamous misogyny speech, i.e. endless repetitions of "I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by that man" in increasingly hysterical tones.

Is it worth emailing Classic FM with an objection?

No.  Because they would, as always, find a way to justify their programming, however obscure such a reason might be.

At least George Brandis is on the right track as he suggests any arts organisation rejecting private funding (eg that of Transfield for the biennale) should consider themselves no longer a candidate for any government funding.
Go Mr Brandis.


----------



## rumpole (16 March 2014)

Julia said:


> When overwhelmed by the Left political content on ABC Radio National and the Local Radio network, I seek refuge in Classic FM.  So it was this evening.
> 
> Lo, I'm regaled with a musical (?) version of Julia Gillard's infamous misogyny speech, i.e. endless repetitions of "I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by that man" in increasingly hysterical tones.
> 
> .




Can't wait for the musical


----------



## noco (17 March 2014)

It will be interesting to watch QANDA tonight to listen to Tony Jones apology to Andrew Bolt over the racial debacle last Monday night.....An apology about the made up stories implicating Andrew Bolt in racial discrimination..

How low can the ABC go? 

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...cs_qa_to_clarify_those_outrageous_falsehoods/


----------



## rumpole (17 March 2014)

noco said:


> It will be interesting to watch QANDA tonight to listen to Tony Jones apology to Andrew Bolt over the racial debacle last Monday night.....An apology about the made up stories implicating Andrew Bolt in racial discrimination..
> 
> How low can the ABC go?
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...cs_qa_to_clarify_those_outrageous_falsehoods/




If Bolt is offended by QANDA, I thought that was what he was fighting for, ie the right to offend others. Well, it's worked, he has been. Serves him right.


----------



## sptrawler (17 March 2014)

I just read this article on the ABC website, thought WOW, that's a say it as you see it piece.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-17/buckingham-the-myth-of-naplan-stress/5325930

I had to re check it was the ABC


----------



## Julia (17 March 2014)

From the ABC website this evening:


> Fran Kelly to host ABC’s Insiders
> 
> ABC journalist Fran Kelly will move to Melbourne to host Insiders for ABC TV while Barrie Cassidy is on leave. Source: News Limited
> 
> ...




Should be an improvement over Barrie Cassidy if she keeps up the more objective approach she has displayed over the last couple of months on RN Breakfast.

Maybe Chris Urhlman will take over hosting Breakfast?  He is wasted on presenting the usually boring "AM".


----------



## sptrawler (17 March 2014)

Julia said:


> From the ABC website this evening:
> 
> 
> Should be an improvement over Barrie Cassidy if she keeps up the more objective approach she has displayed over the last couple of months on RN Breakfast.
> ...




IMO Barrie Cassidy would have to be one of the most boring presenters on t.v. Followed closely by Andrew Bolt.

How is Leigh Sales going these days?


----------



## noco (18 March 2014)

rumpole said:


> If Bolt is offended by QANDA, I thought that was what he was fighting for, ie the right to offend others. Well, it's worked, he has been. Serves him right.




rumpole, I hope you watched QANDA last night.....Tony Jones apologized to Bolt and admitted the stories were false.

That female Professor got all she deserved.


----------



## rumpole (18 March 2014)

noco said:


> rumpole, I hope you watched QANDA last night.....Tony Jones apologized to Bolt and admitted the stories were false.
> 
> That female Professor got all she deserved.




She probably did


----------



## overhang (18 March 2014)

noco said:


> rumpole, I hope you watched QANDA last night.....Tony Jones apologized to Bolt and admitted the stories were false.
> 
> That female Professor got all she deserved.




I didn't watch Q&A and don't know anything about Marcia Langton but it takes a strong person to apologise in public so I give her credit for admitting fault.  Something that Andrew Bolt is far too stubborn and narrow-minded to ever do for his many misleading and incorrect articles over the years.


----------



## noco (18 March 2014)

overhang said:


> I didn't watch Q&A and don't know anything about Marcia Langton but it takes a strong person to apologise in public so I give her credit for admitting fault.  Something that Andrew Bolt is far too stubborn and narrow-minded to ever do for his many misleading and incorrect articles over the years.




So what does Bolt have to apologize for?

Please list them...I am genuinely interested or are you making up stories like Professor Marcia Langton and the the ABC has done on several occasions 

Tony Jones and the ABC are well known for obloquy.


----------



## overhang (18 March 2014)

noco said:


> So what does Bolt have to apologize for?
> 
> Please list them...I am genuinely interested or are you making up stories like Professor Marcia Langton and the the ABC has done on several occasions
> 
> Tony Jones and the ABC are well known for obloquy.




Well the blatantly obvious one is the PAT EATOCK v ANDREW BOLT and HERALD case that found Bolt guilty of racial discrimination.

Just a few weeks ago where he claimed that 'the left' never held any candlelight vigil for the asylum seekers who drowned whilst Labor were in government when in fact they did.

Or how about these claims here http://theaimn.com/2013/10/03/the-facts-versus-andrew-bolt/

I think these days he has his fingers in too many pies and subsequently his fact checking has suffered.


----------



## Logique (18 March 2014)

overhang said:


> I didn't watch Q&A and don't know anything about Marcia Langton but it takes a strong person to apologise in public so I give her credit for admitting fault.  Something that Andrew Bolt is far too stubborn and narrow-minded to ever do for his many misleading and incorrect articles over the years.



Marcia Langton got her fair whack. She forgot she wasn't in an academic cloister or a Leftist street rally, but appearing on a nationally broadcast program. Have you seen pics of Misty Jenkins? Give me a break.   https://encrypted.google.com/search...OCtAbdjgE&sqi=2&ved=0CCMQsAQ&biw=1259&bih=866


----------



## noco (20 March 2014)

Not one word on ABC 7.30 report tonight about Senator Sinidinos or Keven Rudd's Taiwanese $200,000 donation.


----------



## drsmith (12 May 2014)

> A CONTROVERSIAL television program on heart disease breached the ABC’s standards on impartiality, an internal investigation has found.
> 
> The two-part Catalyst episode described the link between saturated fats, cholesterol and heart disease as “the biggest myth in medical history’’ and downplayed the benefits of anti-cholesterol drugs called statins, prompting many to stop taking them.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...reached-abc-code/story-e6frg996-1226914344342

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/heartofthematter/default.htm


----------



## bellenuit (12 May 2014)

ABC's NewsRadio reporting of Blewitt's testimony at the Royal Commission today was shocking. Before it reported on anything that was said it set out to discredit Blewitt. It started by reporting on how he was dressed and the fact that he was wearing respectable clothing (I can't recall if it was a suit or what). It then mentioned that Blewitt had said he couldn't afford to fly back from Malaysia without some recompense and implied that the well dressed appearance meant that this was somehow evidence that his statement of not having much money was untrue and he was not a credible witness. It then repeated Gillard's attack on Blewitt from several months ago when she called him a misogynist lying criminal among other things. There was no mention that the Victoria Police had found the evidence submitted to them by Blewitt as credible. Finally it discussed the slush fund and almost under her breath, the reporter said that the UWA officials had engaged Gillard, who was employed by Slater and Gordon, to help set up the fund. There was no mention that the fund was illegal and that it was set up without the knowledge of the AWU (other than Blewitt and Wilson).


----------



## Julia (12 May 2014)

Yes, that's almost exactly how it was covered on both Radio National and the Local Radio network news/PM, but PM did include Mr Blewitt's account of paying the cash to Wilson at Gillard's home, and separately, burying cash in his backyard because "there was just so much cash".


----------



## drsmith (13 May 2014)

The bitterness within the ABC on the success of this government's border protection strategies runs deep,



> Morrison clearly enjoys Abbott's confidence; after all, he has stopped the boats, or at least turned them back, which to the voters of the western suburbs amounts to the same thing, even if Fiona Scott still has to suffer traffic jams on the M4. And he is definitely a minister on the make; he has revelled in speculation that he could one day take the top job himself. Which should make the thoughtful very nervous. Allowing politicians whose ambition and arrogance greatly outweigh their abilities and character to acquire their own private armies is seldom a good idea.
> 
> To take just one obvious example: when Adolf Hitler gave his mate Heinrich Himmler control of the SS in 1929, the organisation was a single battalion of 290. Within a year Himmler had raised its ranks to 3,000 and by the time Hitler gained supreme power in 1933 the SS numbered 52,000. And so it went.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-...rison-and-the-australian-border-farce/5446224


----------



## SirRumpole (13 May 2014)

drsmith said:


> The bitterness within the ABC on the success of this government's border protection strategies runs deep,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-...rison-and-the-australian-border-farce/5446224




Dr Smith, the article you quoted is an *opinion piece* by an independent journalist, just like articles by Peter Reith, Chris Berg and other Right wing commentators who write for The Drum.

To ascribe MacCallums opinions as those of the ABC is mischievous.


----------



## drsmith (13 May 2014)

It's an opinion piece that's been published under the ABC banner.

There's no rational justification for the comparison between Scott Morrison and Adolf Hitler and any such comparison shouldn't have made it past the cutting room floor.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 May 2014)

drsmith said:


> It's an opinion piece that's been published under the ABC banner.
> 
> There's no rational justification for the comparison between Scott Morrison and Adolf Hitler and any such comparison shouldn't have made it past the cutting room floor.




Well, that is the free speech that is so important to most of us on this forum. Morrison can sue if he wants to, but I would assume the ABC had sought the advice of their lawyers before publishing the article.


----------



## wayneL (13 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, that is the free speech that is so important to most of us on this forum. Morrison can sue if he wants to, but I would assume the ABC had sought the advice of their lawyers before publishing the article.




I dont think Zachary is questioning the right to say that, but questioning the wisdom and impartiality of the national broadcaster in saying it.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 May 2014)

wayneL said:


> I dont think Zachary is questioning the right to say that, but questioning the wisdom and impartiality of the national broadcaster in saying it.




The national broadcaster did not say it, Mungo MacCallum did. If they did not allow him to say it , would it be censorship ? The Drum isn't Q&A , I'm sure the ABC runs opinion pieces past their lawyers first. Other commentators like Peter Reith lambasted Labor on The Drum, I see no reason why the current government should be immune from criticism.

Personally I found the comparison 'over the top'. We don't have private armies in this country, but if MacCallum thinks the comparison is valid, that's just his opinion.


----------



## trainspotter (13 May 2014)

Godwin's Law all over again ... anyone ... anyone?


----------



## sptrawler (13 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The national broadcaster did not say it, Mungo MacCallum did. .




His column is a regular feature on the ABC site, one wonders if he is a paid columnist?

If he is paid and his opinion is printed without a disclaimer, it probably follows that the ABC agree with it.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (13 May 2014)

sptrawler said:


> His column is a regular feature on the ABC site, one wonders if he is a paid columnist?
> 
> If he is paid and his opinion is printed without a disclaimer, it probably follows that the ABC agree with it.




On The Drum home page, ABC employees are pointed out eg 


"Blinded by bounty

Given the way income taxes were hacked in the previous decade, mostly for the benefit of high income earners, redressing this imbalance seems only sensible now.

By* ABC's* Ian Verrender
"

Mungo does not carry the ABC epithet so it could be assumed he is freelance


"The Australian Border Farce

What is Scott Morrison's reward for orchestrating the paranoia about asylum seekers that is so hurting Australia's foreign policy? The answer: a new border security force.

By Mungo MacCallum"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/thedrum/

Maybe he did get paid, one assumes he doesn't work for nothing, did Peter Reith ?


----------



## sptrawler (13 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> On The Drum home page, ABC employees are pointed out eg
> 
> 
> "Blinded by bounty
> ...




Yes Rumpole, I really don't care what they have to say, somewhat like Bolt.

It falls under the old saying "The less you say, the more people listen".
All of these opinionated columnist sound like single minded ranters. IMO 

I guess the pressure of deadlines and having to put food on the table, lends itself to them ranting on pet subjects.


----------



## Julia (13 May 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm sure the ABC runs opinion pieces past their lawyers first.



Like they did with The Chasers and their gross representation of Chris Kenny ****ing a dog?
Now they're up for potentially paying large amounts of taxpayer dollars when the court case has concluded, and have belatedly apologised.

McCallum's comment was in the worst possible taste and the ABC should not have hosted it.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 May 2014)

Julia said:


> McCallum's comment was in the worst possible taste and the ABC should not have hosted it.




So the ABC should now be the "taste" police ? LOL.

Funny how some people (not necessarily yourself) get upset about criticisms of the rich and powerful who are well able to hit back, but not false allegations made against marginalised individuals and groups *by *the rich and powerful.


----------



## sptrawler (26 May 2014)

Media watch certainly had a great time bagging Abbott tonight, hope it goes well for them.

I thought it was media watch, guess i'm wrong.


----------



## Duckman#72 (27 May 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Media watch certainly had a great time bagging Abbott tonight, hope it goes well for them.
> 
> I thought it was media watch, guess i'm wrong.




I am currently reading Gideon Haigh's biography of Shane Warne and he makes an interesting comment about Paul Barry's biography of the same person........ he said it was written with a "sneering priggishness".  

It struck me as a very insightful description that could apply to great majority of Paul Barry's work. 

Duckman


----------



## sptrawler (28 May 2014)

I see in Fairfax today, the ABC is saying they will cut peppa pig due to budget cuts. 
Apparently it's a popular kids show.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...fice-to-god-of-prosperity-20140528-394ml.html

I hope someone in Government is watching all this garbage, and holding someone to task for the statements.

If they can't substantiate their programe or staff cuts, management should be sacked, for political staging.IMO


----------



## sydboy007 (30 May 2014)

They could be showing a level of bias against the NBN, at least on Q&A

below is a table for when MT has fronted on the show and how many times the NBN - a key plank of his portfolio and opposition / Government policy - was discussed during his appearances.  1 out of 12 appearances to discuss the NBN seems to be quite poor.  Certaainly not as mark Scott from the ABC told the Senate last Wednesday that Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had faced “many questions” about the issue on the show.

Possibly on Lateline as well since they've not done an form of NBN segment so far this year.  Considering it's the largest infrastructure project in Australian history, and with the major changes that have occurred to the network after the Coalition was voted into Government, surely it's a newsworthy topic.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> They could be showing a level of bias against the NBN, at least on Q&A
> 
> below is a table for when MT has fronted on the show and how many times the NBN - a key plank of his portfolio and opposition / Government policy - was discussed during his appearances.  1 out of 12 appearances to discuss the NBN seems to be quite poor.  Certaainly not as mark Scott from the ABC told the Senate last Wednesday that Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had faced “many questions” about the issue on the show.
> 
> Possibly on Lateline as well since they've not done an form of NBN segment so far this year.  Considering it's the largest infrastructure project in Australian history, and with the major changes that have occurred to the network after the Coalition was voted into Government, surely it's a newsworthy topic.




It may be a newsworthy topic, but I don't hear the Labor party talking about it much, or defending their design. I think they are embarrassed by the cost and their lack of achievement.

 Not that the Libs are achieving much either. Turnbull's role in Opposition as I recall was to "destroy the NBN". I think he's achieving that aim in government.



> Discussion shut down by Tony Jones




This makes out that TJ shut the discussion down for 'political reasons'. How long did he let it go on ?

There are obviously other questions people want to ask, and you can't spend the whole show on one topic.

 Tony Jones is a bit maligned I think. He's got a tough job to balance the number of questions and stop politicians droning on and trying to dominate others.


----------



## dutchie (3 June 2014)

ABC *News*24 has spent 90% of its time this morning talking about the Bolt/Turnbull item.

Is this the best the ABC can do? I want my money back!

Yes 90% is an exaggeration but really how pathetic are they?

More news less crap ABC

ABC has no idea of showing the news, ALP has no ideas about fixing the economy - solution put down Tony Abbott to fill the vacuum.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2014)

dutchie said:


> ABC *News*24 has spent 90% of its time this morning talking about the Bolt/Turnbull item.
> 
> Is this the best the ABC can do? I want my money back!
> 
> ...




I agree.

Bolt's qualifications to be taken seriously on any issue are so insubstantial that he is unworthy of any media attention at all.


----------



## Julia (3 June 2014)

dutchie said:


> ABC *News*24 has spent 90% of its time this morning talking about the Bolt/Turnbull item.
> 
> Is this the best the ABC can do? I want my money back!
> 
> ...



Same occurred last night with a segment on it on 7.30 for heaven's sake, plus at the same time the Local Radio network in Qld at least was also inviting callers to air their views about it.
What a complete beat up.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 June 2014)

Julia said:


> Same occurred last night with a segment on it on 7.30 for heaven's sake, plus at the same time the Local Radio network in Qld at least was also inviting callers to air their views about it.
> What a complete beat up.




I disagree. It is big news that Bolt is attacking Turnbull. After all he is the most powerful commentator in the country, and a friend of the Libs. The fact that he is attacking shows he is scared of Tony being toppled and he obviously doesn't want Malcolm to be the next Leader. 

Turnbull enjoys a high regard in the Australian community which Abbott doesn't have. The leadership speculation is justified.


----------



## dutchie (3 June 2014)

ABC should stop making the news and just report the news (with no bias).

Biggest beat up since the Tooth Fairy**.



**Apologies to all children


----------



## Julia (3 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> I disagree. It is big news that Bolt is attacking Turnbull. After all he is the most powerful commentator in the country,



The most powerful commentator in the country?????  You can't seriously think that, surely, Knobby!

I don't know anyone (except perhaps noco) who takes Andrew Bolt seriously.  

And Andrew himself, of course.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2014)

Julia said:


> I don't know anyone (except perhaps noco) who takes Andrew Bolt seriously.




+1 (but I can't comment on noco)

Bolt has no credibility apart from his friends in high places. 

If Abbott , Bernadi & co stopped crawling to him, no one would watch him on TV or read his columns.

He tells a particular audience what they want to hear, as cheap populists do.


----------



## Julia (3 June 2014)

Perhaps a little similar to Clive Palmer.   A panel of political commentators was asked a few weeks ago:
"if Clive Palmer were not a (self proclaimed) billionaire, would anyone be interested in what he thought about anything?"

Unanimous answer:  no, not for a moment.

I guess you could extrapolate the question to:
"if Clive Palmer did not hold any part of the balance of power in the Senate, would anyone care what he thought about anything?"

What does it say about the Australian electorate that possession of large amounts of money is ascribed such importance?
How is that we are so shallow as to be so impressed by extreme (?gross) affluence?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2014)

Julia said:


> How is that we are so shallow as to be so impressed by extreme (?gross) affluence?




Because money is power.

At least Palmer is out in the open,  exposing himself to public scrutiny, unlike people like Nathan Tinkler who try and subvert democracy covertly, and run away overseas when the going gets tough.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 June 2014)

Julia said:


> The most powerful commentator in the country?????  You can't seriously think that, surely, Knobby!
> 
> I don't know anyone (except perhaps noco) who takes Andrew Bolt seriously.
> 
> And Andrew himself, of course.




I agree not many at ASF take him seriously but we are well educated and follow the political process more closely than most. 

Andrew Bolt has the backing of Gina Reinhardt who got him the gig on Channel 10 and I know quite a few older people who take him very seriously indeed. In Victoria, the Herald Sun has a large readership yet the paper is basically empty of news so he is a must read. As Noco says his ratings on TV are reasonable and he has all the resources of Newscorp behind him.


----------



## Julia (4 June 2014)

Yes, I suppose it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking people in general are discerning about what they see and hear.

It's the same as all the mindless devotion given to Ray Hadley and Alan Jones with the utter rubbish they spout on their radio programs.  Their listenership thinks they are god's own oracles.

Last night the Delroy late talk back was on Clive Palmer.  Just amazing the people who think he's terrific, who believe he's Australia's salvation, and only a few who recognise that for Clive it's all about Clive and see his populist rhetoric for what it is.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 June 2014)

Julia said:


> Yes, I suppose it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking people in general are discerning about what they see and hear.
> 
> It's the same as all the mindless devotion given to Ray Hadley and Alan Jones with the utter rubbish they spout on their radio programs.  Their listenership thinks they are god's own oracles.
> 
> Last night the Delroy late talk back was on Clive Palmer.  Just amazing the people who think he's terrific, who believe he's Australia's salvation, and only a few who recognise that for Clive it's all about Clive and see his populist rhetoric for what it is.




Clive is lucky.
He got voted in because we were all so disgusted with Labor and not very trusting of Abbott (and I think the public has been proven right on this). Greens are increasingly loony left so somehow he has become the alternate even moderate voice in Parliament. it shows how low we have gone federally imo.


----------



## Julia (4 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> he has become the alternate even moderate voice in Parliament. it shows how low we have gone federally imo.



+1.  So disheartening.


----------



## Calliope (4 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Clive is lucky.
> He got voted in because we were all so disgusted with Labor and not very trusting of Abbott (and I think the public has been proven right on this). Greens are increasingly loony left so somehow he has become the alternate even moderate voice in Parliament. it shows how low we have gone federally imo.




What is disheartening is that intelligent people like yourself can be hoodwinked into turning to Clive Palmer as your political saviour. Your forlorn cry "my only hope is Clive Palmer"  is a sad indictment on our society, that when one politician lies to us, we turn to someone so two-faced that that all he can mouth are threats, lies, platitudes and insults.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 June 2014)

Calliope said:


> What is disheartening is that intelligent people like yourself can be hoodwinked into turning to Clive Palmer as your political saviour. Your forlorn cry "my only hope is Clive Palmer"  is a sad indictment on our society, that when one politician lies to us, we turn to someone so two-faced that that all he can mouth are threats, lies, platitudes and insults.




More a sad indictment of our politicians and present political system. 
Clive Palmer would have been lucky to get a second vote (after his own) normally.

The Australian doesn't want to make it clear but the Others voting that excludes the Greens and the major parties is running near 15%. You can bet most of that is PUP. I think that says it all about the popularity of the major parties.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/polling


----------



## Calliope (4 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> I think that says it all about the popularity of the major parties.




I think it says more about the gullibility of the electorate. Can you name any of his policies or principles that have attracted you to him?


----------



## Duckman#72 (4 June 2014)

Calliope said:


> I think it says more about the gullibility of the electorate.




Gullibility and this all pervasive creeping sense of entitlement that is washing over the country, and the reluctance to take responsibility for actions.

We want the Government to take control of the finances, but we don't want any negative effects.

We want the exploding Centrelink payments reined in, but we don't want the pain. 

We point the finger at the whinging Greeks and their austerity measures, but won't move in that direction ourselves.

We want the best medical services, but we demand they be free.

Such an environment is tailor-made for someone such as Palmer who just jumps from wave of dissent, to the next wave of dissent, "fighting the good fight" for the "battlers and underdogs". 

He is the perfect role model for the disenchanted, as Clive doesn't believe he needs to be accountable to anybody either. 

Duckman


----------



## SirRumpole (4 June 2014)

> We want the best medical services, but we demand they be free.




Medical services are not free, they are paid for by our taxes, income tax, Medicare levy and GST.

While I don't object to a reasonable co payment, the proposed designed is going to create a slush fund which this government will give to their friends in big pharma for 'research', rather than going back into the health system to make it more 'sustainable'.

 The way the co-payment will be used is a con.


----------



## Calliope (4 June 2014)

Duckman#72 said:


> Gullibility and this all pervasive creeping sense of entitlement that is washing over the country, and the reluctance to take responsibility for actions.
> 
> We want the Government to take control of the finances, but we don't want any negative effects.
> 
> ...




Spot on.


----------



## sydboy007 (4 June 2014)

Calliope said:


> I think it says more about the gullibility of the electorate. Can you name any of his policies or principles that have attracted you to him?




What do policies or principals mater when they're thrown overboard and the real agenda is foisted on the public after the election is over and done with?


----------



## sydboy007 (4 June 2014)

Duckman#72 said:


> Gullibility and this all pervasive creeping sense of entitlement that is washing over the country, and the reluctance to take responsibility for actions.
> 
> We want the Government to take control of the finances, but we don't want any negative effects.
> 
> ...




i don't believe this.  i think if the budget hadn't been as draconian as it is - I mean no income support for unemployed under 30s is just beyond the Australian experience - there would have been a better reception by the public.  Doctor co payment better targeted so as to not impact the poor would be palatable too, but the way the Govt is trying to cut $11 in payments to doctors mean they can't afford to bulk bill without the co payment.

The fact that our world leading 8% of GDP in tax expenditures were left totally alone is also a strike against fairness.  If the Govt had actually done some real structural reform like limiting the cost of super on the budget, or quarantined NG to newly constructed housing, then most of us might have felt the burden of adjustment is being more fairly distributed.

The fact is pretty much any centrist economist sees the budget as expecting the poor to face a more than unfair share of the budget burden.  Factor in the policy on the fly medical research fund that is funded by the doctor co payment (so that $7 isn't actually helping to get the budget back into balance) and it's not hard to understand the poor reception of the budget.

I say give the public some meaningful reforms, we're hungry for it.  We'll whinge and moan about it, but if you fairly distribute the burden and make structural reforms that will over the medium term get the budget back to surplus, you WILL get the respect of voters and the time in power you need to see the reform process through.

the LABERALS are so far not up to the challenge.  If the greens could chop out Milne and let Ludlam lead, and have policies that actually address the cost of housing and lack of competitiveness in the economy, well they could actually turn into the third force in politics we need to force the majors to come up with good policy, not rentier class policy that keeps us going backwards.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 June 2014)

Hear,hear, Sydboy

The disgust of the electorate is all about the two faced behaviour of our present leaders.

If the budget had of been about balancing the budget, it would have got support from the electorate, like Howard's did. It is not about fairness in any way and is really about changing the way Australia works to more closely match the USA. It is social engineering without the mandate. 

If it was about balancing the budget then why the company tax cuts?? 

Why have they not tackled any of the issues that bleed the economy as you mentioned?
If Abbott is allowed to get away with this then it is carte blanche for any politician to lie before an election. Get rid of him. New Liberal leader please (no point waiting).


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2014)

> If it was about balancing the budget then why the company tax cuts?




And why squirrel away most of the bulk billing co payment into a slush fund instead of putting it back into service delivery ?


----------



## Calliope (5 June 2014)

sydboy007 said:


> What do policies or principals mater when they're thrown overboard and the real agenda is foisted on the public after the election is over and done with?




Okay...you have taken it upon yourself to answer a question I put to Knobby. What then, is it about Palmer that attracts you and Knobby to him? His hatred of Abbott perhaps? It seems to me that it is the only common ground you have.


----------



## wayneL (5 June 2014)

Syd, draconian budget?

Surely you jest, against what could have, should have been done, this one was unremarkable


----------



## Duckman#72 (5 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Why have they not tackled any of the issues that bleed the economy as you mentioned?




The Coalition stupidly fell into the trap that Labour set for them before the election - by agreeing to maintain expenditure for basically this whole term. They didn't want to rock the boat, mainly because they realised they didn't have Mr Popularity running for PM. They agreed to maintain the status quo. As a result there was a clear disconnect between the rhetoric of the Coalition and their commitments. 

You cannot scream and shout about budget emergencies and stopping the waste, and then go into an election saying ...."we promise to commitment to everything they do".   

They are between a rock and a hard place now. They should have been much tougher in certain areas - but have been constrained by their pre election commitments, and where they have broken promises, all hell has broken loose, because they haven't kept their word.

It is ironic that Tony Abbott says the Government need to keep their nerve and resolve. The time they needed guts, resolve and nerve was some straight talking before the election.

Very disillusioned. Sorry off topic - back on the ABC.

Duckman


----------



## Knobby22 (5 June 2014)

Duckman#72 said:


> Very disillusioned. Sorry off topic - back on the ABC.
> 
> Duckman




Yes, talk about thread drift. 
Can't stop myself. I agree Duckman with your analysis. 
....which is why the Libs need a reboot. New leader, new vision.. and if they want to achieve anything and have a chance of being re-elected...now. I am sure John Howard is thinking "I knew Tony wasn't up to it". There is plenty of talent in the party but Tony has mainly gone with the old hacks, the B team guys of Howard's era.


----------



## Logique (7 June 2014)

Too many General Chat posts from me this weekend.

However could I say, not every part of the ABC is bad. The ABC radio Classic FM - Classic 100: _Baroque and Before_ is running this weekend, it's ..beyond description.  Link: http://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/

What would our lives be without this national ABC classical music station.  Week days _Classic Breakfast_ with Emma Ayres, this excellent program has to be heard to be believed. When you hear the Kookaburras call at daybreak, turn on your radio, it will be Emma with some classical music.

No I don't work for the ABC. But you'll see me on the barricades if any of these programs are attacked.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> There is plenty of talent in the party




Such as ?


----------



## noco (7 June 2014)

Logique said:


> Too many General Chat posts from me this weekend.
> 
> However could I say, not every part of the ABC is bad. The ABC radio Classic FM - Classic 100: _Baroque and Before_ is running this weekend, it's ..beyond description.  Link: http://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/
> 
> ...




Yes there are some good programs on ABC and nobody can deny it......I like Macca on a Sunday....have listened to him for years.


----------



## noco (7 June 2014)

Duckman#72 said:


> Gullibility and this all pervasive creeping sense of entitlement that is washing over the country, and the reluctance to take responsibility for actions.
> 
> We want the Government to take control of the finances, but we don't want any negative effects.
> 
> ...




+1 hear hear and so say all of us......well a majority of us.


----------



## Julia (7 June 2014)

So agree, Logique.   Even the measured tones of Classic FM presenters, along with the interesting stories they provide about the music, calm the soul of those of us driven to despair by the political machinations of politicians and media sensationalists.

I love Julia Lester on Drive.  That woman has a voice which would melt the hardest heart.


----------



## dutchie (12 June 2014)

The ABC: "There's a Royal commission into union corruption ???"


----------



## dutchie (12 June 2014)

According to the unbiased ABC
The evil of Unions and Gillard   --


----------



## Knobby22 (12 June 2014)

According to the Department of Communications yesterday, media rules are being reviewed er being cleared for Murdoch.
Not only will the rules for public TV stations be relaxed allowing foreign owned News to own Foxtel, 10 (or 9), newspapers and radio stations but the cross ownership rules for the country will similarly be relaxed allowing ownership of a country station e.g. Southern Cross/Win etc by companies that own the city stations. 

As Turnbull is in charge of this process, it should stand him in good stead with News Limited and therefore increase  his chance of gaining the Prime Ministership in the future.

Along with the reviews (er competition being removed for Murdoch) of SBS being merged into the ABC and the ABC budget being slashed further, we can look forward to a sad future where ABC foreign correspondents will be further removed from the world increasing reliance on foreign news sources for all our international news. I am confident ABC24 will not survive this process.


----------



## Calliope (12 June 2014)

The ABC is hoping. praying, advocating that Abbott's meeting today with President Obama will be marred by their differences on climate change. This is just wishful thinking.



> On November 12, 2012, a journalist asked Obama if the political will existed in Washington to legislate “some kind of a tax on carbon”.
> 
> The short answer was no, but this is what Obama actually said: “….that if the message is somehow we’re going to ignore jobs and growth simply to address climate change, I don’t think anybody is going to go for that. I won’t go for that …. we’re still trying to debate whether we can just make sure that middle-class families don’t get a tax hike.”
> 
> Abbott couldn’t have put it better himself.






> So suggestions that US-Australia relations are threatened by Abbott’s approach, or that Australia will be humiliated if climate change is not placed prominently on the G20 agenda are so much gaseous emissions.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e-in-obama-talks/story-fnahw9xv-1226951170451


----------



## Julia (12 June 2014)

The ABC itself, on 7.30 last night, featured one talking head who said it was simply not done to have any sort of confrontation in these meetings, a mutual respect for different views taking precedence.

Also, for all Mr Obama's rhetoric, from what I've heard about his 30% reduction it just sounds to be aspirational.
If that's wrong and he has managed - despite the Republican objections - to legislate something which makes it mandatory - then I'm sure one of our resident climate change enthusiasts will quickly correct me.

Possibly more likely that he wants to go down in the history books as having made some placatory noises to appease those who believe we're doomed before his term is over.


----------



## noco (19 June 2014)

Here are some truths about how politically biased the ABC is with there current affairs programs.

The ACMA have received more complaints about the ABC than any outlet media outlet.....So why are the ABC so biased towards the Green/Labor socialist left wing?.......It is all about socialistic control of peoples minds to indoctrinate them into socialism and away from conservatism.......you know, make the conservatives look bad and greedy....I like the philosophy of Abraham Lincoln which I  posted some months ago. 


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-from-tv-viewers/story-e6freon6-1226959204755


----------



## boofhead (19 June 2014)

What truths? Details are not released in that story except all complaints dismissed. Is it a case that ABC is more likely to talk more deeply about social and political issues? The mainstream commercial channels have nothing comparable in coverage as the ABC.

Was there a complaint that the ABC did not push Turnball enough on the NBN?


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2014)

boofhead said:


> What truths? Details are not released in that story except all complaints dismissed. Is it a case that ABC is more likely to talk more deeply about social and political issues? The mainstream commercial channels have nothing comparable in coverage as the ABC.




+1. Absolutely correct.

A media outlet is much less likely to have complaints when they resort to cheap populism and discuss nothing contraversial or outside the boundaries of the general interest of the majority of populace which is usually sport or sensationalism.



> Possibly more likely that he wants to go down in the history books as having made some placatory noises to appease those who believe we're doomed before his term is over.




That would seem pretty pointless if he knew that AGW is phony.


----------



## noco (19 June 2014)

boofhead said:


> What truths? Details are not released in that story except all complaints dismissed. Is it a case that ABC is more likely to talk more deeply about social and political issues? The mainstream commercial channels have nothing comparable in coverage as the ABC.
> 
> Was there a complaint that the ABC did not push Turnball enough on the NBN?




Yes and there is a good chance the ACMA is loaded with lefties planted there by the Labor Party.

It is a bit like putting the fox in the pen to look after the chickens,


----------



## Calliope (19 June 2014)

boofhead said:


> Was there a complaint that the ABC did not push Turnball enough on the NBN?




I assume you mean Senator Conroy. Actually it's perfectly normal that the ABC would cover up his gross incompetencies.


----------



## DocK (19 June 2014)

> We’re talking of course about the union royal commission, which last week was one the biggest shows in town:
> 
> 
> "SANDRA SULLY: Tonight, in the hot seat, Julia Gillard’s former boyfriend faces the music at the union’s Royal Commission.
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4026504.htm

I was pleasantly surprised to see this covered by Media Watch this week.  As the ABC is funded by all taxpayers, it would be good to see all the newsworthy topics of the day covered.  When I was a child the ABC was the only tv station that we received, goodness only knows how that may have shaped my political views if it had been my only source of political commentary.  In retrospect, I don't recall there being anywhere near as much cherry-picking of what was or wasn't newsworthy, or as much of a political slant put on coverage way back then.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2014)

> "ANDREW BOLT: The ABC has run absolutely dead on the Julia Gillard slush fund scandal, absolutely dead. It’s been not a story, it’s been terrible. The rare time say, in Melbourne, the 774 presenter Jon Faine, has ever talked to reporters covering it , it has been to yell at them and heckle them ...
> 
> ”” 2GB, Nights with Steve Price, 10th June, 2014"
> 
> ...




Ignoring it ? 

ABCNews24 has been running live broadcasts of the Royal Commission, except when they cut to media interviews by Tony Abbott or Scott Morrison, and occasionally Shorten and Milne.


----------



## Calliope (19 June 2014)

> ABC’s managing director Mark Scott and the broadcaster’s chairman James Spigelman hosted controversial MP Clive Palmer on their table at the press gallery Midwinter Ball in Canberra last night.
> 
> Mr Palmer, who has vowed to vote against many of the government’s budget measures, was invited onto the ABC’s corporate table so that Mr Scott could establish a good relationship with the Queensland MP, who already is a fixture on the ABC’s news and current affairs channels.




Scott and Palmer have a lot in common. They share a hatred of Abbott and the Liberals. Now they are cosying up. Not a good look.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t-midwinter-ball/story-fn59niix-1226959194160


----------



## boofhead (19 June 2014)

Calliope said:


> I assume you mean Senator Conroy. Actually it's perfectly normal that the ABC would cover up his gross incompetencies.





I mean Turnball. He has not been hardpressed this year about the NBN his party wants to roll out. Delimiter/Renai had a story about it recently. Seems NBN is not to be discussed with Malcolm while in ABC studios.


----------



## Julia (19 June 2014)

DocK said:


> I was pleasantly surprised to see this covered by Media Watch this week.  As the ABC is funded by all taxpayers, it would be good to see all the newsworthy topics of the day covered.  When I was a child the ABC was the only tv station that we received, goodness only knows how that may have shaped my political views if it had been my only source of political commentary.  In retrospect, I don't recall there being anywhere near as much cherry-picking of what was or wasn't newsworthy, or as much of a political slant put on coverage way back then.






SirRumpole said:


> Ignoring it ?
> 
> ABCNews24 has been running live broadcasts of the Royal Commission, except when they cut to media interviews by Tony Abbott or Scott Morrison, and occasionally Shorten and Milne.



Perhaps, rather than an all-encompassing ABC groupthink, it's actually dependent on the producers/presenters of the various programs what focus is taken?

As someone who finds quality information on radio is much better than that on TV, I have no complaints about, eg, the coverage of current events on "PM" which runs for almost an hour 6 - 7pm weeknights.  They have covered the Royal Commissions into Institutional Abuse and the one on the Unions in sequential detail, including direct testimony.  I suppose the additional available time helps.

"The World Today", about one hour at lunchtime tends to go more for subtle anti government stuff, nothing really overt but continuous implications and guests who support the Left agenda.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2014)

> Perhaps, rather than an all-encompassing ABC groupthink, it's actually dependent on the producers/presenters of the various programs what focus is taken?




I think that's probably true.

 From what I've seen of "Inside Business", Tikki Fullerton takes a more right wing view than some others might.

 Just a guess but as the pay on commercial stations is usually better than at the ABC (at least in the halcyon days of Kerry Packer maybe not so much now), it wouldn't look good for a prospective presenter wanting a higher paying job at a commercial station to take a Left wing approach.


----------



## boofhead (19 June 2014)

That is surprising as Tikki in the past has presented more strongly green views - especially with her time on Landline.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2014)

boofhead said:


> That is surprising as Tikki in the past has presented more strongly green views - especially with her time on Landline.




I think she would make a good politician. Tell the audience what they want to hear.


----------



## bellenuit (19 June 2014)

Julia said:


> Perhaps, rather than an all-encompassing ABC groupthink, it's actually dependent on the producers/presenters of the various programs what focus is taken?
> 
> As someone who finds quality information on radio is much better than that on TV, I have no complaints about, eg, the coverage of current events on "PM" which runs for almost an hour 6 - 7pm weeknights.  They have covered the Royal Commissions into Institutional Abuse and the one on the Unions in sequential detail, including direct testimony.  I suppose the additional available time helps.
> 
> "The World Today", about one hour at lunchtime tends to go more for subtle anti government stuff, nothing really overt but continuous implications and guests who support the Left agenda.




I don't want to sound too conspiratorial, but could it be that overall they may appear somewhat balanced, but when it comes to audience reach, the most popular shows are far more to the left. So their prime time TV shows like the 7'OClock News, Q&A and Insiders clearly show an anti-government bias, the radio programs, which are probably only listened to by a more discerning audience, show balance. Additionally, though they show balance, is there any ABC program, TV or radio, that has a right wing agenda (like, for instance, the Bolt Report). Left orientated and balanced when taken together is still tending to the left on average.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 June 2014)

> Additionally, though they show balance, is there any ABC program, TV or radio, that has a right wing agenda (like, for instance, the Bolt Report).




LOL

What do you want, balance or bias ?

Why should any ABC program run an agenda ?


----------



## DocK (19 June 2014)

bellenuit said:


> I don't want to sound too conspiratorial, but could it be that overall they may appear somewhat balanced, but when it comes to audience reach, the most popular shows are far more to the left. So their prime time TV shows like the 7'OClock News, Q&A and Insiders clearly show an anti-government bias, the radio programs, which are probably only listened to by a more discerning audience, show balance. Additionally, though they show balance, is there any ABC program, TV or radio, that has a right wing agenda (like, for instance, the Bolt Report). Left orientated and balanced when taken together is still tending to the left on average.




Yes, this had occurred to me also.  I would assume that the bulk of the ABC's news and current affairs audience would be its prime time slots  on ABC1 - and this is a different demographic to that of the daytime and radio audience I would think.  I'm assuming that coalition voters outnumber labor/greens in the over 50's age group but the opposite possibly applies for under 30's?  

Many busy working people only have time for tv of an evening.  It would be nice to be able to rely on at least one news bulletin to be free of any political agenda, and one would expect that the station funded by the people for the people should be that one.


----------



## bellenuit (19 June 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> LOL
> 
> What do you want, balance or bias ?
> 
> Why should any ABC program run an agenda ?




Balance of course. But my point was that if there wasn't an overall left agenda and if any bias was because of purely human factors that are difficult to eliminate, then we should expect to see that bias going both ways. But any bias when shown is to the left, at least 95% of the time.


----------



## IFocus (19 June 2014)

bellenuit said:


> Balance of course. But my point was that if there wasn't an overall left agenda and if any bias was because of purely human factors that are difficult to eliminate, then we should expect to see that bias going both ways. But any bias when shown is to the left, at least 95% of the time.




There is no bias to left as Bolt is to the extreme gloating right I think the ABC are fairly central but get judged as left simply because they canvass social issues the other media outlets don't because there is no profits in it.

Q&A which commercial net work would bother?


----------



## Julia (19 June 2014)

bellenuit said:


> I don't want to sound too conspiratorial, but could it be that overall they may appear somewhat balanced, but when it comes to audience reach, the most popular shows are far more to the left. So their prime time TV shows like the 7'OClock News, Q&A and Insiders clearly show an anti-government bias, the radio programs, which are probably only listened to by a more discerning audience, show balance. Additionally, though they show balance, is there any ABC program, TV or radio, that has a right wing agenda (like, for instance, the Bolt Report).



No, I cannot think of even one.  
"Counterpoint", on Radio National,  hosted by Amanda Vanstone is apparently their token conservative contribution.  I often hear it and it can only be considered conservative because of the political affiliation of the host.  It's on at an obscure early afternoon weekday


> Left orientated and balanced when taken together is still tending to the left on average.



Yes, agree.  I do think, though, that Leigh Sales on 7.30 is good.  She delivers the hard questions to both sides which is what a host should do.  Hope her maternity leave is not much longer.



DocK said:


> Yes, this had occurred to me also.  I would assume that the bulk of the ABC's news and current affairs audience would be its prime time slots  on ABC1 - and this is a different demographic to that of the daytime and radio audience I would think.  I'm assuming that coalition voters outnumber labor/greens in the over 50's age group but the opposite possibly applies for under 30's?



Again, I can only comment on radio, but definitely not on late evening radio on both major networks.
The host only needs to put up any slightly anti government topic and the calls of hate just flood in from older people.  If you attempt to phone in with an alternative view, you're smartly told by the producer "thanks for your call.  We'll take that as a comment" whereupon he hangs up on you.



> Many busy working people only have time for tv of an evening.



I don't quite understand what you mean here.  You have to actually devote time to watching TV.  With radio you can be doing other things while listening.  I have PM on in the evenings when doing meal preparation etc.


> It would be nice to be able to rely on at least one news bulletin to be free of any political agenda, and one would expect that the station funded by the people for the people should be that one.



The main reason I avoid watching ABC TV news.


----------



## Tink (20 June 2014)

That is so wrong, and that is what our taxs pay for?
It is suppose to be for ALL.


----------



## dutchie (20 June 2014)

The ABC's claim that they are not bias is in the same sphere as Wayne Swan's claim of a surplus - just plain BS!


----------



## noco (4 July 2014)

At long last, the ABC is in for a long awaited shake up with the appointment  of Janet Albrechtsens and Neil Brown to the ABC appointment panel......Tony Jones should be the first to go......The Green/Labor bias is about to be cracked.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._give_a_gonski_about_albrechtsens_appointmen/


----------



## Calliope (4 July 2014)

noco said:


> At long last, the ABC is in for a long awaited shake up with the appointment  of Janet Albrechtsens and Neil Brown to the ABC appointment panel......Tony Jones should be the first to go......The Green/Labor bias is about to be cracked.




*Neil Brown: I’d scrap ABC and start over*

The problem is that it would be impossible to sell the ABC. What reputable company would want to buy a braodcaster staffed with left wing idealogues. Can you imagine the furore from the Labor/Greens and the Fairfax press if a new owner tried to turf them out. It would be worse that that caused by trying to send illegal immigrants back home.



> HE is just one member of an influential four-person panel responsible for appointing future ABC board directors.
> 
> But, if it were up to him, former Liberal Party deputy leader Neil Brown QC would sell off what he describes as the overly commercial and unnecessarily expansive ABC and start the process of publicly funding a news organisation from scratch.
> 
> ...



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...c-and-start-over/story-fna045gd-1226977124062


----------



## Julia (4 July 2014)

The following are a couple of examples of the Comments following the article in The Australian:


> the long and slow migration of the ABC from news organisation to political mouthpiece reminds me of the frog in boiling water analogy. We, the silent majority have not noticed the slow creeping take over until now and its too late.
> 
> It's a pity the ABC didn't heed the rising tide of discontent with regard to their biased one-sided reporting and editorials, because it now seems that they may have shot themselves in the foot, and things beyond their control will be put in place to redress their continued unbalanced representations.  I would just love to see Q&A with a truly balanced panel where we could hear a range of differing views and arguments.  We do ourselves a disservice by pandering to the one-sided argument.




Malcolm Turnbull was subjected to very aggrieved and aggressive questioning on "AM" on RN this morning over the appointment of these two people (both of whom I welcome).  Mr Turnbull was polite but entirely firm, saying it was nothing to do with him that as Minister he has no responsibility for and was not consulted about the appointments.  
I can  just imagine the collective outrage at the ABC.  About time.


----------



## noco (4 July 2014)

Julia said:


> The following are a couple of examples of the Comments following the article in The Australian:
> 
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull was subjected to very aggrieved and aggressive questioning on "AM" on RN this morning over the appointment of these two people (both of whom I welcome).  Mr Turnbull was polite but entirely firm, saying it was nothing to do with him that as Minister he has no responsibility for and was not consulted about the appointments.
> I can  just imagine the collective outrage at the ABC.  About time.




Julia, I have no doubt there will be some ethnic cleansing about to take place......It really is in the Governments hands to gradually weed out the left wing radicals.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 July 2014)

I have no problem with the Libs putting their stamp on the board and weeding out the left wing as long as they don't try to shut it down.


----------



## banco (4 July 2014)

Julia said:


> The following are a couple of examples of the Comments following the article in The Australian:
> 
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull was subjected to very aggrieved and aggressive questioning on "AM" on RN this morning over the appointment of these two people (both of whom I welcome).  Mr Turnbull was polite but entirely firm, saying it was nothing to do with him that as Minister he has no responsibility for and was not consulted about the appointments.
> I can  just imagine the collective outrage at the ABC.  About time.




Howard tried similar things and they had close to zero impact.  They are just pissing into the wind.


----------



## Calliope (4 July 2014)

banco said:


> They are just pissing into the wind.




You are probably right. Like a malignant cancer, they are firmly entrenched.


----------



## Julia (4 July 2014)

banco said:


> Howard tried similar things and they had close to zero impact.  They are just pissing into the wind.



I think that's right, banco.  But since those times the ABC has become significantly more a political mouthpiece and probably the present government is more serious about effecting some change in the Board than John Howard was, or needed to be, at the time.

An example of their attempting to proclaim correct morality is in their coverage the last few days of

(a) the Rolf Harris situation, giving endless air time to people who sob that their childhood was taken away from them because he once groped them when they were 15, and

(b) the boat transfers that may or may not be occurring with the Sri Lankan asylum seekers, where they have interviewed pretty much every Left refugee advocate available (and there's no shortage of them) to demonstrate that Australia must be in contravention of the refugee convention etc.  Their outrage is palpable.

The notion that their Board should have perhaps a couple of conservative members is beyond their comprehension apparently.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 July 2014)

> (b) the boat transfers that may or may not be occurring with the Sri Lankan asylum seekers, where they have interviewed pretty much every Left refugee advocate available (and there's no shortage of them) to demonstrate that Australia must be in contravention of the refugee convention etc. Their outrage is palpable.




If you gave equal time to the government on this, all you would get is 30 minutes of "no comment".

I think it's justifiable for the ABC and other media outlets to get a bit shirty and say to the government in effect "if you don't talk to us, the other side will".

The idea that a few unarmed refugees in a leaky boat is a national security threat is absurd. If the government won't talk, the media will find other ways to get the facts, if they are doing their jobs.


----------



## basilio (4 July 2014)

In theory, in a democracy, in an open society, a critical role of the media is to hold politicians to account.  To question what has been done in our name. To hold a light to practices that some politicians, businesses or unions might like to keep in hiding. To give the public an open, honest and informed understanding on what is happening around them. (_Yes it does sound very preachy doesn't it ? )_

An alternative view of the  media is simply a vast entertainment complex that keeps businesses and advertisers happy. The news is just stories created to press emotional buttons and sell copy. Truth,  relevance and accuracy are irrelevant. If it bleeds it leads and  rescuing cats from drains finishes the bulletin.

I like the fact that the ABC  goes for the first version of a free, informative press. I can understand that the free market  prefers the second version - but then the free enterprise system isn't that interested in a robust democracy is it ?

____________________________________________________________________________________

By the way Julia just because the Government says it is obeying international conventions on refugees doesn't mean it actually is. The fact is that international refugee conventions do not allow countries to simply send back asylum seekers to the countries they are fleeing.  It would be the equivalent of sending escapes from Soviet Union back home or Jews fleeing the Nazis. 

In fact the international laws on the treatment of asylum seekers was developed after WW2 in 1951 to address these issues.

http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html


----------



## basilio (4 July 2014)

Regarding the situation with refugees and the Refugee Convention the Government solemnly claims it is following. 

This is what the convention clearly, unequivocally states.


> *The principle of non- refoulement is so fundamental that no reservations or derogations may be made to it. It provides that no one shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee against his or her will, in any manner whatsoever, to a territory where he or she fears threats to life or freedom. Finally, the Convention lays down basic minimum standards for the treatment of refugees, without prejudice to States granting more favourable treatment. Such rights include access to the courts, to primary education, to work, and the provision for documentation, including a refugee travel document in passport form.*




Is this what we see happening at the moment ?

http://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html


----------



## Knobby22 (4 July 2014)

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/12/18/trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-telegraph-takes-a-hit/


----------



## basilio (4 July 2014)

Nice little story from Crikey Knobby..



> Particularly interesting to see how highly trusted the  ABC is for its news and current affairs versus a far more support for the commercial media.
> 
> And, yet again, The Daily Telegraph is Australia’s least trusted major newspaper. Only 48% of its readers had some or a lot of trust in it in January; now just 41% of readers have trust in the Telegraph, while 25% of readers have no trust at all in what they read in it, a figure rivalled only by the Herald Sun, for which 22% of its readers have no trust at all.
> 
> ...


----------



## noco (4 July 2014)

basilio said:


> Regarding the situation with refugees and the Refugee Convention the Government solemnly claims it is following.
> 
> This is what the convention clearly, unequivocally states.
> 
> ...




I realize this post does not really relate to to this particular thread, but in reply perhaps you should have let ASF readers in on the rest of your link....note my bolds.

The convention originated back in 1951 and I was witness to many refugees from Germany, Italy and the UK who came by boat with full documentation of ID and passports.......they were mostly good tradesman whom  integrated into the community and and earned a living without relying upon welfare like the illegals we have here now......most of the modern illegals will be reliant on welfare from the Australian tax payers for the rest of their lives.   

There are a few "IFS AND BUTS" which you did not reveal.

There is a fair bit of contradiction in the wording and it is all a matter of interpretation.

4
convention
and
protocol
*The Convention does not however apply to all persons who might otherwise
satisfy the definition of a refugee in Article 1. In particular, the Convention
does not apply to those for whom there are serious reasons for considering
that they have committed war crimes or crimes against humanity, serious
non-political crimes, or are guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and prin-
ciples of the United Nations. The Convention also does not apply to those
refugees who benefit from the protection or assistance of a United Nations
agency other than UNHCR, such as refugees from Palestine who fall under
the auspices of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine
Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). Nor does the Convention apply to those
refugees who have a status equivalent to nationals in their country of asylum.*
Apart from expanding the definition of a refugee, the Protocol obliges States
to comply with the substantive provisions of the 1951 Convention to all per-
sons covered by the refugee definition in Article 1, without any limitation
of date. Although related to the Convention in this way, the Protocol is an
independent instrument, accession to which is not limited to States parties
to the Convention.
Under the Convention and Protocol, there is a particular role for UNHCR.
States undertake to cooperate with UNHCR in the exercise of its functions,
which are set out in its Statute of 1950 along with a range of other General
Assembly resolutions, and, in particular, to facilitate this specific duty of
supervising the application of these instruments. By its Statute, UNHCR is
tasked with, among others, promoting international instruments for the pro-
tection of refugees, and supervising their application.
The fundamental importance and enduring relevance of the Convention and
the Protocol is widely recognized. In 2001, States parties issued a Declaration
reaffirming their commitment to the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol,
and they recognized in particular that the core principle of
non-refoulement
is embedded in customary international law.
(4)
Moroever, the General Assem-
bly has frequently called upon States to become parties to these instruments.


----------



## noco (4 July 2014)

basilio said:


> Nice little story from Crikey Knobby..




That poll by Essential report was taken back on the 17th January 2013.

It does not indicate how the poll was taken and where it was taken.......perhaps it might have been on entry into Q and A one Monday night......LOL.......Sure looks good though.


----------



## Julia (4 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> If you gave equal time to the government on this, all you would get is 30 minutes of "no comment".
> 
> I think it's justifiable for the ABC and other media outlets to get a bit shirty and say to the government in effect "if you don't talk to us, the other side will".
> 
> The idea that a few unarmed refugees in a leaky boat is a national security threat is absurd. If the government won't talk, the media will find other ways to get the facts, if they are doing their jobs.



You are perhaps missing the point about what the government is doing.   They are, so far successfully, establishing an absolute deterrent to both people smugglers and people who can afford to pay them, that they can just arrive in Australia and automatically attain participation in our welfare system.  Whilst in the meantime those genuinely determined refugees who have been waiting often for many years in various UNHCR camps throughout the world, with no money to pay people smugglers, are denied their admission to Australia via our humanitarian refugee program.  For every boat arrival admitted, that's one less established refugee able to come.




basilio said:


> In theory, in a democracy, in an open society, a critical role of the media is to hold politicians to account.  To question what has been done in our name. To hold a light to practices that some politicians, businesses or unions might like to keep in hiding. To give the public an open, honest and informed understanding on what is happening around them.



Oh right, basilio.  The problem is that the ABC presents this 'open, honest and informed understanding' largely from the Left view.  Can't you get that this is what the problem is with the ABC?  I suppose not, because you share their ideology so in your view they will be preaching what is absolutely correct and balanced.


____________________________________________________________________________________



> By the way Julia just because the Government says it is obeying international conventions on refugees doesn't mean it actually is.



I have made no determination about this.  I don't know.  I do know that if the government were to get completely fed up with the bleating about what they are trying to do, as outlined above, they could have Australia simply withdraw from the Refugee Convention.
I have often made the point above about well off 'asylum seekers' being admitted in favour of those patiently waiting in camps but it's something you have never, as far as I have seen, ever acknowledged the reality of.
We need an orderly migration program, not just a free for all which favours those able to pay smugglers.



Knobby22 said:


> http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/12/18/trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-telegraph-takes-a-hit/



As noco has pointed, this is more than eighteen months old, and from a well known Left organ, Bernard Keane in particular being one of their most Left writers.

Essential is a Labor Party research offshot.

I note just one part as an example:


> The trust of readers in individual newspaper mastheads has also generally fallen. The Age is Australia’s most trusted newspaper, with 68% of Victorian voters having some or a lot of trust in what they read in it, but it has fallen three points this year.




The Age is "Australia's most trusted newspaper"   with   "68% of Victorian voters having some or a lot of trust in what they read in it".
Wow.  They claim it's the most trusted newspaper in Australia on the basis of its Victorian readership.
Not only completely out of date but illogical as well.


----------



## bellenuit (4 July 2014)

Julia said:


> Whilst in the meantime those genuinely determined refugees who have been waiting often for many years in various UNHCR camps throughout the world, with no money to pay people smugglers, are denied their admission to Australia via our humanitarian refugee program.  For every boat arrival admitted, that's one less established refugee able to come.




Julia, this is something I have written to my local member, Julie Bishop, about.

I can't for the life of me understand why the Coalition are not talking about the number of genuine refugees that have gained access to Australia because of the increased places their successful policy has made available. Surely it would make it much harder for the ABC, Labor/Greens and refugee advocates to spread their negativity if one could show the refugees who have been welcomed into the Australian community in the last year and who otherwise would still be languishing in UNHCR camps.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

> You are perhaps missing the point about what the government is doing. They are, so far successfully, establishing an absolute deterrent to both people smugglers and people who can afford to pay them, that they can just arrive in Australia and automatically attain participation in our welfare system. Whilst in the meantime those genuinely determined refugees who have been waiting often for many years in various UNHCR camps throughout the world, with no money to pay people smugglers, are denied their admission to Australia via our humanitarian refugee program. For every boat arrival admitted, that's one less established refugee able to come.




I have no argument about that, however if  the governments program is so successful, why the media blackout ? Shout it from the rooftops how well their program is working to discourage more refugees. The media lockout simply invites suspicion of their tactics and fires accusations of a coverup.

I believe the majority of the electorate approves of the end result of "Sovereign borders", but there is increasing suspicion of the underlying methods used and growing resentment at being kept in the dark by an arrogant Minister.

As someone once said "if people don't know what you are doing, they don't know what you are doing wrong".


----------



## noco (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I have no argument about that, however if  the governments program is so successful, why the media blackout ? Shout it from the rooftops how well their program is working to discourage more refugees. The media lockout simply invites suspicion of their tactics and fires accusations of a coverup.
> 
> I believe the majority of the electorate approves of the end result of "Sovereign borders", but there is increasing suspicion of the underlying methods used and growing resentment at being kept in the dark by an arrogant Minister.
> 
> ...




Suck it up Sun Shine.....if that is the way they want to operate, so be it.......you can do little about it......so stop whinging.

Yes, and many of us have increasing suspicion of the underlying methods used by the ABC and we have had little choice but accept their modus operandi....FOR NOW.... but hopefully things are about to change....The ABC have followed the Fabian Society teachings....have control of the media and have a free reign to preach their propaganda in a very subtle way in an attempt to destroy and discredit any conservative Government.

Well, the Green/Labor left wing socialists did NOT always let us know what they were doing  2007/2013 so I believe they did not know what they were doing wrong......OR DID THEY?...I will leave others to decide that.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

> Suck it up Sun Shine.....if that is the way they want to operate, so be it.......you can do little about it......so stop whinging.




Whining is something I can do about it, so I will, along with an increasing number of others.


----------



## IFocus (5 July 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> I have no problem with the Libs putting their stamp on the board and weeding out the left wing as long as they don't try to shut it down.





I do, jack boots at the front door, its an outrage when a government (Abbott) politicises the ABC by appointing party members with minority views.


----------



## IFocus (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Whining is something I can do about it, so I will, along with an increasing number of others.





Its really quite serious with attempts to turn the ABC into a government mouth piece and the ongoing secrecy around asylum seeker boats. 
When a government is allowed to operate in this manner bad things happen, remember the Australian public rank politicians as the least trusted (with good cause) and yet there are those here ignore that fact.

Now there is a precedent set around running an excuse to do stuff in secret, not report to either the parliament or public what happens when the other mob get in.............you will reap what you........


----------



## dutchie (5 July 2014)

bellenuit said:


> Surely it would make it much harder for the ABC, Labor/Greens and refugee advocates to spread their negativity if one could show the refugees who have been welcomed into the Australian community in the last year and who otherwise would still be languishing in UNHCR camps.




They (ABC, Labor/Green) would not give a stuff about that aspect, its all about putting Abbott and Australia down.


----------



## dutchie (5 July 2014)

IFocus said:


> ...........you will reap what you........




Yes - secure borders!


----------



## Julia (5 July 2014)

bellenuit said:


> Julia, this is something I have written to my local member, Julie Bishop, about.
> 
> I can't for the life of me understand why the Coalition are not talking about the number of genuine refugees that have gained access to Australia because of the increased places their successful policy has made available. Surely it would make it much harder for the ABC, Labor/Greens and refugee advocates to spread their negativity if one could show the refugees who have been welcomed into the Australian community in the last year and who otherwise would still be languishing in UNHCR camps.



Bellenuit and Rumpole, perhaps the government do make this point but the media fail to print/broadcast it?

Or perhaps it's just another example of the government's failure to properly communicate its message.



IFocus said:


> I do, jack boots at the front door, its an outrage when a government (Abbott) politicises the ABC by appointing party members with minority views.



Oh, please.   Minority views?  Try to remember that it wasn't Labor and the Greens who won the election.

Give us a list of any conservative ABC Board members.  Then give us a list of conservative presenters or producers across TV and radio. 

  If you don't count Amanda Vanstone's obscurely placed "Counterpoint" on RN for half an hour on Friday afternoons, which can only be loosely described as token conservatism simply because she was a Liberal Minister, every presenter demonstrates a clear Left bias.
It has been particularly noticeable with Robin Williams, presenter of The Science Show, who has relentlessly gone on with warmist dogma and really vituperative sneering of anyone who is not a disciple.  There is never anyone with a contradictory view allowed on the program.

This same principle applies across ABC Radio.  They constantly have guests who reflect their own views and it's just everyone agreeing with everyone else and total sneering about anyone with an alternate view.

If Mark Scott were to be replaced with someone who had a more even handed approach, the ABC could easily get back to being the great organisation it once was.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Whining is something I can do about it, so I will, along with an increasing number of others.




Yes there are increasing levels of whinging and whining in support of the ABC's love of the illegals. What is your agenda?  Open borders?


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> Yes there are increasing levels of whinging and whining in support of the ABC's love of the illegals. What is your agenda?  Open borders?




Why don't you actually read what I have written instead of slinging mud on people who are not in total agreement with you. I bet if a Labor government had refused to speak to the people about this issue you would be yelling "communist repression of the media". Get used to criticism if your mob does the same thing.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Why don't you actually read what I have written instead of slinging mud on people who are not in total agreement with you. I bet if a Labor government had refused to speak to the people about this issue you would be yelling "communist repression of the media". Get used to criticism if your mob does the same thing.




There's no need to get grumpy Rumpy. I did read what you said. You said;



> Whining is something I can do about it, so I will, along with an increasing number of others.




I would never sling mud at you Rumpy. I was merely enquiring as you what is your agenda along with the other Labor/Green/ABC whiners.
Do you prefer open borders to border protection?  All this whining about Morrison not telling you and the people smugglers his plans in advance, is just nonsense.


----------



## banco (5 July 2014)

Julia said:


> If Mark Scott were to be replaced with someone who had a more even handed approach, the ABC could easily get back to being the great organisation it once was.




When didn't it have a left wing bias?


----------



## noco (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> There's no need to get grumpy Rumpy. I did read what you said. You said;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Calliope, I don't know what the lefties are complaining about?...I don't know why it is even being discussed?...furthermore it is all on the wrong thread.

The Government have stopped the que jumpers, they have saved lives and halted the burden on the Australian tax payers.

There are lot more deserving people wanting to flee far greater oppression and persecution than these economic illegals but they cannot afford it.......Let the Government bring in refugees in a more organized,  legal and sustainable way and the Government will once the Green/Labor socialist left wing mess has settled down......They have put the fire out and now it time to clear the wreckage away first.   

The Government have a quota of refugees which we can afford to assist and  it will done in due course in the proper manner.

The problem with the Fabian Society indoctrinated Green/Labor socialist left wing party is they dislike the Government success because I remember them saying it cannot be done and it is sticking in their gisset so they now have to carry on like a pork chop at a Jewish picnic.


----------



## Julia (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> Yes there are increasing levels of whinging and whining in support of the ABC's love of the illegals. What is your agenda?  Open borders?






Calliope said:


> There's no need to get grumpy Rumpy.
> Do you prefer open borders to border protection?  All this whining about Morrison not telling you and the people smugglers his plans in advance, is just nonsense.



Calliope, Rumpole simply expressed his dislike of the lack of information being provided by the government.
Much of the population, even that part which supports the harsh measures needed to provide a deterrent to people smugglers and their clients, feels similarly.  

Surely that's no reason for you to once again attribute to him a disagreement about border protection?
It's something you do constantly and imho contributes nothing constructive to the discussion.



banco said:


> When didn't it have a left wing bias?



Thank you for acknowledging the reality rather than suggesting any sort of balance would represent the view of a minority.

Yes, in the 22 years I've been familiar with the ABC there has been some left bias, but it has become vicious in the last few years.  It's not just the ABC.  Fairfax joins in, along with Crikey.   Nasty stuff like the depiction of Chris Kenny ****ing a dog.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> There's no need to get grumpy Rumpy. I did read what you said. You said;
> 
> 
> 
> ...




As I said, I agree with the end result of the Coalition policy, but does the end justify the means in all cases ? There are reports that Tamil asylum seekers were handed over to the Sri Lankan navy, ie the people they were running away from originally. That would violate the "non refoulment" clause of the Refugee treaty which we have agreed to. The fact that the government has not commented on whether this has happened indicates it might be true. A government which is prepared to cover up on one issue can't be trusted on others. They are blotting their copybook very badly.

As for "telling plans in advance", they won't tell us the results "in retreat". That's suspicious in my book.


----------



## sydboy007 (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> As I said, I agree with the end result of the Coalition policy, but does the end justify the means in all cases ? There are reports that Tamil asylum seekers were handed over to the Sri Lankan navy, ie the people they were running away from originally. That would violate the "non refoulment" clause of the Refugee treaty which we have agreed to. The fact that the government has not commented on whether this has happened indicates it might be true. A government which is prepared to cover up on one issue can't be trusted on others. They are blotting their copybook very badly.
> 
> As for "telling plans in advance", they won't tell us the results "in retreat". That's suspicious in my book.




Makes me worry we'll end up with more cases like Haneef where the Government hand picks the judge and jury to determine guilt or lack thereof.

The L+NP criticised Labor for their lack of transparency in Govt, but then all oppositions do that we're lucky if they don't try to reduce the level of information flowing to the public when next in power.

Now we have the current Govt doing it's best to make FOI about as effective as mammary glands on a bull.  It's ridiculous that tax payer funded reports are, at best, released heavily redacted.  The more that's hidden the greater the chance of poor decisions being made.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/25/australias-right-to-know-is-under-assault

_The details are still unclear, but this is what we know so far. The Office of the Australian Commissioner (OAIC), designed to be a champion of open government, will be abolished. Complaints will be heard by the commonwealth ombudsman, although there will be given no additional resources to deal with them.

Reviews of FOI decisions will go the administrative appeals tribunal, which will likely cost more than $800. It is anticipated the government may also seek to reintroduce some kind of application fee to the FOI process.

None of this bodes well for access to government information._

A classic example of the system’s shortcomings was provided by Fairfax’s Chris Vedelago, who while trying to ascertain information on the level of foreign purchases of Australian real estate, was led down a farcical path by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB). Three FOI requests later and the best Vedelago could come up with is a stack of blanked-out and redacted pages from FIRB.

As noted by Vedelago, it should really be know as the “Freedom From Information Act”, and the Coalition’s reforms are only likely to make transparency even worse.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2014)

Julia said:


> Surely that's no reason for you to once again attribute to him a disagreement about border protection?
> It's something you do constantly and imho contributes nothing constructive to the discussion.




If you care to read Rumpy's latest post, he does have a disagreement about Border Protection, particularly in the handling of the Tamil illegals. But this is the wrong thread. You can read more about Border Protection constructive discussions on the relevant thread.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> If you care to read Rumpy's latest post, he does have a disagreement about Border Protection, particularly in the handling of the Tamil illegals. But this is the wrong thread. You can read more about Border Protection constructive discussions on the relevant thread.




The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.

 I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.
> 
> I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.




I will reply to you Rumpy on the appropriate thread when I get around to it.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> I will reply to you Rumpy on the appropriate thread when I get around to it.




I'm pulling my eyelids out waiting for your response


----------



## banco (5 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.
> 
> I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.




I'm sorry but Rudd said a lot of stuff.  For good or ill I can't imagine a Labor Government going to the lengths that Morrision etc. has been willing to go to.  To take but one example the handover of the Sri Lankans to the Sri Lankan navy is almost certainly a breach of Australia's treaty obligations (assuming it goes ahead).


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2014)

To the last, the ABC defends Labor's carbon tax.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...nvestment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262


----------



## overhang (7 July 2014)

drsmith said:


> To the last, the ABC defends Labor's carbon tax.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...nvestment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262




I don't see how that article is defending Labors 'carbon tax lie' but merely pointing out that the coalitions stance is hindering the renewable energy industry that will cause a loss of jobs and investment in Australia.  The coalition have long claimed we are open for business which is certainly the case if you're a coal miner.  So whilst jobs and investment will be saved in that area it will be lost in others as pointed out in this article.


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2014)

overhang said:


> I don't see how that article is defending Labors 'carbon tax lie' but merely pointing out that the coalitions stance is hindering the renewable energy industry that will cause a loss of jobs and investment in Australia..



Perhaps some of this investment was driven by misguided government policy and subsidy. Another historical example that comes to mind here was forestry.

For the ABC though, the broader context is about the carbon tax.



overhang said:


> The coalition have long claimed we are open for business which is certainly the case if you're a coal miner.  So whilst jobs and investment will be saved in that area it will be lost in others as pointed out in this article.



While specific sectors may benefit, there is a net detriment to business and the economy overall with an increased cost of energy.


----------



## overhang (7 July 2014)

drsmith said:


> Perhaps some of this investment was driven by misguided government policy and subsidy. Another historical example that comes to mind here was forestry



I wouldn't say misguided, the policy was in place however it was always risky when the opposition at the time vowed to remove Labors efforts at lowering our dependency on coal due to strong lobbying from that industry.



> For the ABC though, the broader context is about the carbon tax.




I have no idea how you can take that from that article that hardly mentions the carbon tax.  Like I say its important to inform the public that the coalitions policy is having a negative impact on some industry's and jobs because the Government or News corp certainly wont.


> While specific sectors may benefit, there is a net detriment to business and the economy overall with an increased cost of energy.




This is probably true.


----------



## noco (8 July 2014)

The ABC is out of control......It is in full swing supporting the Alarmists of Global Warming.......With reporting like this, full of lies and exaggeration, what chance has the Government got all this crap they preach?


Andrew Bolt
July 08 2014 (7:53am)


Record sea ice around Antarctica this year:

    image

As for ice on Antarctica itself, even if you believe the calculations of the warmist US National Climate Assessment the loss is actually minimal:

    Antarctica is losing about 0.0045% of its ice per decade””about 4.5/10,000ths of a percent per year. 

But here is how the ABC’s Lateline last night reported on Antarctica, omitting both the above critical facts:

    EMMA ALBERICI, PRESENTER: There’s more research tonight pointing to dramatic changes underway in Antarctica. Australian researchers have identified how warm water is increasingly pushing out cold water around the white continent, prompting more ice to melt and further sea level rises.  

Reader Lachie spent last night watching an ABC entirely captured by the Left:

    It started with The Drum full of glee at Palmer blocking $8 Billion of savings of the budget and had refugee advocate Allan on arguing how Australia was in all manner of human rights breaches over the Tamil return, ably assisted by the host.

    The news was full of the same, making the Abbott Government look terrible and Clive Palmer look powerful. More condemnation of the Australian government over human rights abuses and the High Court decision to prevent the Sri Lankan handover. Showed Jenny Macklin demanding that they keep the schoolkids bonus.

    The 7:30 programme went into full inner city latte mode with the following:

        - Sabra Lane highlighting Abbott’s difficulties and the fawning over the PUP party power in the new Senate

        - An interview with lawyer David Manne over Australia’s terrible human rights abuses of the current Sri Lankan boat people.

        - A pro-Palestinian piece focussing mostly on the dead Palestinian youth and how the Israeli settlers are occupying more land in the settlements. (Just your typical left wing bias glossing over the barbaric Palestinian behaviours.)

    Four Corners then had a Steven Long piece only interviewing global warming alarmists and solar/wind carpet baggers [plus Environment Minister Greg Hunt] about how Australia was being completely left behind by not rushing out to pour even more borrowed billions to throw at renewable energy. There was no contrary viewpoint put about their inefficiency or the huge cost to power consumers.


    Media Watch‘s Paul Barry had a huge whinge about the two new appointments to the panel appointing ABC board members, attacking their lack of impartiality and their inability to not be biased. The great irony is that Barry asked for impartial appointees, without observing the total Left wing bias of the whole ABC organisation.

    Q&A was the usual four-against-one panel with poor Judith Sloan battling against a panel and an audience just wanting full-on spend-spend Keynesian economics and saying there was absolutely no budget emergency. The banner along the bottom was meanwhile running the headline with excited glee about the High Court stopping the refugee transfers. Q&A tonight was supposed to be only about economics but unsurprisingly a questioner still managed to ask a question about our refugee policy and whether Australians should be ashamed of our government and ridiculously likened it to late 1930s sending Jews back to Nazi Germany.

    Lateline ran with glee the lead story of how the High Court has halted the Sri Lankan transfer and their guest for the evening was - surprise surprise - a refugee advocate.  The political headlines were again about Clive Palmer’s success at punching an $8 Billion hole in Tony Abbott’s budget.  Next was an global warming alarmist piece about how Antarctica is warming much quicker because they have now found warmer water is melting the ice at a much faster rate and will lead to tenths of metre rise increases over the next century (as in cm’s but it sounds much scarier said in tenths of metres). 

    How the ABC can continue to serve up this blatant leftist bias whilst violating their charter constantly? They must be feeling they are under no pressure to comply.

    For this to just be an average night’s viewing on this public behemoth is quite scary and I hope someone in the government takes up this issue - starting with the replacement of Malcolm Turnbull who is absolutely useless on the issue.  

The ABC is out of control.


----------



## DocK (8 July 2014)

I did enjoy Australian Story though - really like Megan Washington - voice of an angel.


----------



## basilio (8 July 2014)

I also saw the ABC 4 Corners program last night.  Appropriately called Power to the people

Amazing wasn't it to see the range of US states going full bore for solar and wind energy. Democrats and Republicans alike.

Great to see how the technology of storing solar and wind power is now mature and operational. To see how Apple is running  its huge servers solely off renewables not simply because it is cleaner but because it is reliable *and they ran it.*

Fascinating to see how the old boy treasurer from the Orange Bowls club installed 136 solar panels to tackle their huge power bill. Payback time is 3 years

And underlying all of this change is the simple fact that renewable energy is infinite and, after establishment, far and away cheaper and more reliable than fossil fuels.

Yep coal fired energy stations will fold - much like the horse and cart. And if you had actually bothered to note it Noco the program did look at the increases in electricity costs and everyone agreed the largest component was deliberate gold plating of poles and wires infrastructure.

Naturally this was a ABC program Noco. We would expect nothing less.

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/four-corners/NC1404H023S00


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2014)

basilio said:


> Fascinating to see how the old boy treasurer from the Orange Bowls club installed 136 solar panels to tackle their huge power bill. Payback time is 3 years



The payback for the solar panels on the roof of my house was under 3-years but that was due to the huge government subsidies on offer, both at the state and federal level.

Gold plating of electricity infrastructure is a separate issue and doesn't change the merit (or otherwise) of government favouring a particular industry or technology through subsidy and/or policy that increases the absolute cost of the alternatives.

Fossil fuel in my view is a stepping stone towards harnessing greater forms of energy. Renewable energy in the present context is not infinite. It is limited by what the sun can shine on the earth and from that, what we can harness.


----------



## basilio (8 July 2014)

drsmith said:


> The payback for the solar panels on the roof of my house was under 3-years but that was due to the huge government subsidies on offer, both at the state and federal level.
> 
> Gold plating of electricity infrastructure is a separate issue and doesn't change the merit (or otherwise) of government favouring a particular industry or technology through subsidy and/or policy that increases the absolute cost of the alternatives.
> 
> Fossil fuel in my view is a stepping stone towards harnessing greater forms of energy. Renewable energy in the present context is not infinite. It is limited by what the sun can shine on the earth and from that, what we can harness.




Few points
1) The gold plating of electricity infrastructure is part of the explicit subsidy for current centralised power systems. Interestingly enough a very good reason for encouraging people to have solar panels was to ensure the power industry didn't have to provide  expensive  extra peak load generation. Teh solar panels did that quite nicely.

2) The fossil fuel industry is already massively subsidised by governments. Paying of industry infrastructure, other subsidies. Check out the billion dollar list below.

3) I think you are being cute with saying renewable energy is not infinite. My meaning (and the accepted meaning) is that unlike fossil fuel resources the sun, wind and waves will always provide energy. The amount available will also be on a scale sufficient to power human activity.

Lets agree that fossil fuels have been a stepping stone for civilization and that now is the time to move forward to cleaner renewable energy sources  *before we actually run out of a polluting  non renewable energy*

http://environmentvictoria.org.au/fossilfuelsubsidies#.U7tWNkDNyyM


----------



## Knobby22 (8 July 2014)

Agree Basilio. Made Australia look a bit backward compared to the USA.
The Republican state Texas is actually one of the most forward states in using alternative energy.

With regard to the news, what does Andrew Bolt want? "Look away, look away, nothing happening here?"


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2014)

It is strange basilio that you are now pushing your climate change hysteria stuff on The ABC is Political thread.:screwy:


----------



## Julia (8 July 2014)

Calliope said:


> It is strange basilio that you are now pushing your climate change hysteria stuff on The ABC is Political thread.:screwy:



Any thread will do.  Basilio isn't too discriminating about taking every opportunity to go on about climate change.

For once I agree with Andrew Bolt.  Last night's ABCTV's program seemed in its entirety to be designed for maximum attempt to influence the PUP senators before the vote on the carbon tax is taken.

The ABC has no compunction in ignoring any notion of balance when it comes to pushing their own agenda.


----------



## basilio (8 July 2014)

And exactly who mentioned 'climate change'  folks ? I certainly didn't do so *in any way*. 

Neither did the 4 Corners program.

And perhaps remember I was responding to Noco's trashing of a particularly good ABC examination of the direction of Australia's energy future.

The reasons for moving from non renewable polluting energy sources like coal/oil/gas to renewable cleaner processes include:

1) Longer term energy savings
2) National energy security 
3) Heading off (or trying to) the risk of complete societal collapse when current energy sources turn down (Peak oil/coal )
4) Local energy control
5) Reduction in carbon pollutants.  (The most obvious of these are carbon particulates but obviously you can include CO2 emissions.)

And Andrew Bolt's comments ? Well he is *never, ever, ever *going to support  a renewable energy future and the non-government parties over the coal industry and the the Liberal government is he ?

No matter how much sense there is in facts...


----------



## basilio (8 July 2014)

Thought there was a particularly excellent quote from a  State politician in US who was leading the changes to renewable energy

"I may be a Republican but I'm not an idiot" 

Good policies make good sense.


----------



## wayneL (8 July 2014)

basilio said:


> The reasons for moving from non renewable polluting energy sources like coal/oil/gas to renewable cleaner processes include:
> 
> 1) Longer term energy savings
> 2) National energy security
> ...




All great reasons. The trick in my opinion is avoiding the pathological and quasi religious hatred of fossil fuels and apacalyptic subterfuges to further renewables. 

Put across this way, society will willingly move to renewables poste haste, rather than resisting them due to the ever more obvious corruption of climate science imo.


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2014)

If we were to consider for a moment that all energy was derived from renewable sources, what population could the planet sustain ensuring all has a reasonable living standard ?


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2014)

basilio said:


> And exactly who mentioned 'climate change'  folks ? I certainly didn't do so *in any way*.




Sorry bas, I thought renewable energy was all about climate change. Now that you assure me it is not, I say bugger renewable energy, and just give us cheap energy and lower power bills.

By the way. Better luck on proving that the ABC is not biased, than you had selling your doomsday nonsense on the other thread.  

To digress a little...I watched a series on SBS recently called Last Tango in Halifax. There where plenty of beautiful landscape shots of the English countryside around Halifax. One jarring note was the sight of these ugly windtowers in the background. They are a blot on the landscape.I agree with Boris Johnson.



> Writing in The Sun on Sunday he said he was shocked by the number of wind turbines he saw on a recent drive to Scotland.
> "It is a good 20 years since I last drove all the way to Scotland, and in the interim something unbelievable has been done – in our name – to our green, pleasant and precious countryside," he said.
> "I mean the windmills, the turbines – whatever they are called. I mean the things that look like some hideous Venusian invasion, marching over the moors and destroying the dales; the colossal seaside toys plonked erratically across our ancient landscape; the endless parade of waving white-armed old lunatics, gesticulating feebly at each other across the fields and the glens.
> *"They seemed to be everywhere, and I asked myself, when were we consulted? Was there a referendum? Did someone ever warn the British people that these moaning seagull slicers were going to be erected on some of the most sensational scenery that God ever called into being?*





Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/wind-fa...ris-johnson-20130915-2tt61.html#ixzz36qvSJ4oz


----------



## IFocus (8 July 2014)

Julia said:


> Any thread will do.  Basilio isn't too discriminating about taking every opportunity to go on about climate change.
> 
> For once I agree with Andrew Bolt.  Last night's ABCTV's program seemed in its entirety to be designed for maximum attempt to influence the PUP senators before the vote on the carbon tax is taken.
> 
> The ABC has no compunction in ignoring any notion of balance when it comes to pushing their own agenda.




I though this phrase summed up the likes of Bolt very well....of course its from the ABC



> Opinion writers who are "polarisation entrepreneurs", inspire dozens and dozens of comments on their articles, and grow fat with online status in this market. Non-partisan analysis, which educates rather than angers, is not valued as highly as that which triggers righteous outrage. As a result, we have reactive, frothing debates, which lurch from one insignificance to the next, week after week.


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2014)

The ABC's campaign against the government's border protection policies continues with images such as this,



> A girl, named by the Tamil Refugee Council as three-year-old Febrina, who they say was onboard the boat intercepted by Australian authorities




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...l-operation-sovereign-borders-secrets/5581384


----------



## basilio (8 July 2014)

> The reasons for moving from non renewable polluting energy sources like coal/oil/gas to renewable cleaner processes include:
> 
> 1) Longer term energy savings
> 2) National energy security
> ...





> All great reasons. ...
> 
> Put across this way, society will willingly move to renewables poste haste, rather than resisting them due to the ever more obvious corruption of climate science imo.   Wayne l




Yep.  Which is why the ABC program never mentioned Global Warming and neither did I. 

____________________________________________________________________________________

What would be required to transform the world to renewable energy sources  Dr Smith ? _

A ton of work which should have been started 25 years ago.  But you work with what you have.
Any one who has looked at this sees it in terms of Moon Shot landing costs -  very big but ceratinly inside a budget.


> *The world can be powered by alternative energy, using today's technology, in 20-40 years, says Stanford researcher Mark Z. Jacobson
> *
> A new study – co-authored by Stanford researcher Mark Z. Jacobson and UC-Davis researcher Mark A. Delucchi – analyzing what is needed to convert the world's energy supplies to clean and sustainable sources says that it can be done with today's technology at costs roughly comparable to conventional energy. But converting will be a massive undertaking on the scale of the moon landings. What is needed most is the societal and political will to make it happen.




In Australia it could happen in 30 years simply by continuing with the RET scheme.



> > *Renewable energy target can go all the way to 100% – if we let it
> > *
> > The political outlook for renewable energy is not great – and I’m not just talking about the view out of Joe Hockey’s car window. The Renewable Energy Target (RET), which aims to deliver 41 million megawatt-hours…
> > Author
> ...




I know that Beyond Zero Emissions have developed detailed engineering plans based on current technology to move even more quickly to a total  renewable energy powered Australia.

_What population could we sustain under such a scenario ?_ Just can't say Dr Smith. Fact is on a whole range of issues we can't sustain the current worlds population for much longer. Energy is one issue but water, food supplies and other resources are also up there as problems.

Happy reading 

http://theconversation.com/renewable-energy-target-can-go-all-the-way-to-100-if-we-let-it-26318
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2011/january/jacobson-world-energy-012611.html
http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/susenergy2030.html


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2014)

basilio said:


> _What population could we sustain under such a scenario ?_ Just can't say Dr Smith. *Fact is on a whole range of issues we can't sustain the current worlds population for much longer.* Energy is one issue but water, food supplies and other resources are also up there as problems.



I thought that would be the answer that would come back.

My bolds.


----------



## Julia (8 July 2014)

IFocus said:


> I though this phrase summed up the likes of Bolt very well....of course its from the ABC



Ah, the irony!


----------



## noco (8 July 2014)

drsmith said:


> The ABC's campaign against the government's border protection policies continues with images such as this,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...l-operation-sovereign-borders-secrets/5581384




And who would have guessed what political party would be behind this court action....They are outrages and will do anything to allow the boats back in.

OMG......if the court action is successful expect the flood gates to open again......that will make the Fabian society indoctrinated Green/Labor socialist left wings more than happy.


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2014)

noco said:


> And who would have guessed what political party would be behind this court action....They are outrages and will do anything to allow the boats back in.
> 
> OMG......if the court action is successful expect the flood gates to open again......that will make the Fabian society indoctrinated Green/Labor socialist left wings more than happy.




Wouldn't they just be sent for processing to the offshore centres?


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2014)

The latest from the Australian,



> THE Abbott government has no intention of sending 153 asylum- seekers at the centre of a High Court challenge to Sri Lanka where Tamil refugees claim they face persecution, as fresh doubts surfaced over the route of their voyage and the identities of those on board.
> 
> After weeks of denying the boat’s existence, lawyers for the government yesterday revealed the group was being held on a *Customs boat after it was intercepted outside the country’s *migration zone.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ple-to-sri-lanka/story-e6frg6n6-1226982334346


----------



## IFocus (9 July 2014)

drsmith said:


> The latest from the Australian,
> 
> *The Australian understands the government has no intention of sending the boatload to Sri Lanka, nor are authorities in Colombo preparing to receive them.
> *
> ...





Nice to see the government supporting the Liberal daily News paper with backgrounding.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 July 2014)

Report facts that show the right in a bad light or in any way encourage change and your a bias news organization, don't and your News corp and Bolt...bias in a simplistic black and white world.


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2014)

IFocus said:


> Nice to see the government supporting the Liberal daily News paper with backgrounding.



I meant to put that in the asylum seeker thread. 

I've already responded to your nonsense in there which includes a link from your favourite rag.


----------



## noco (15 July 2014)

The ABC is loaded with Fabians and they are following the Trotsky book to the letter.......Take control of the media and push their own propaganda to discredit the Liberal/National coalition and make the Green/Labor left wing socialist look good.

It is all very plain for all to see....the ABC  just brush aside all complaints, like pouring water on a duck's back.

They are a law upon themselves.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e-abc-to-account/story-e6freon6-1226988816723


----------



## basilio (15 July 2014)

It's so simple Noco... it's just so simple  that only a truly simple person  (like yourself no doubt and of course Ms Flint ) can grasp the simple, obvious reality. 

*There is no such thing as truth.* When hand wringing do gooders and human rights lawyers plead for the lives of aslyum seekers they have to fall behind the right of Australia to do whatever it wants to secure its borders.

When animal rights fanatics weep and wail at casual, gratuitous cruelty to sheep dying on stranded boats to the Middle East or brutally butchered in Indonesia they just don't understand the financial facts of life of poor farmers.

And of course, worst of all, when every bleeding climate scientist worth their degree tell us we are cooking the climate and we will be wet toast in a few years *they just don't understand *how critical the fossil fuel industry is to our survival !!

But you Noco and the other friendly, simple folk at the Courier Mail know reality so clearly.

*It is simply whatever you want to believe isn't it mate ?* 

Any of course you don't want to let any pesky facts, legal issues or humanitarian questions get in the way do you ?


----------



## noco (15 July 2014)

basilio said:


> It's so simple Noco... it's just so simple  that only a truly simple person  (like yourself no doubt and of course Ms Flint ) can grasp the simple, obvious reality.
> 
> *There is no such thing as truth.* When hand wringing do gooders and human rights lawyers plead for the lives of aslyum seekers they have to fall behind the right of Australia to do whatever it wants to secure its borders.
> 
> ...




So tell me how is your post related to this thread....."ABC is political."?


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2014)

noco said:


> So tell me how is your post related to this thread....."ABC is political."?




Just Green gross misrepresentations and histrionics Noco.

You should've heard them in parliament yesterday, bleating about "science", yet trotting out every discredited embellishment since Silent Spring.

Obviously, basilio, the Greens and the ABC don't read proper scientific analysis of papers that are published. They continuously repeat the 97% mantra which has so embarrassingly been shown to be a crock of shyte, and promulgate the Goreist religious doctrine of "scare the folks" with mendacious balderdash.


----------



## basilio (16 July 2014)

noco said:


> So tell me how is your post related to this thread....."ABC is political."?




The ABC uses facts as it's guide. It  challenges or doesn't accept  false statements  particularly from self interested parties. 

It attempts to look at different sides of various opinions on  political, social, environmental issues.

It's not driven by a business advertising culture that is beholden to advertisers to keep going. These are the ways in which the ABC is different and  IMO a much more balanced information organization.


----------



## noco (16 July 2014)

wayneL said:


> Just Green gross misrepresentations and histrionics Noco.
> 
> You should've heard them in parliament yesterday, bleating about "science", yet trotting out every discredited embellishment since Silent Spring.
> 
> Obviously, basilio, the Greens and the ABC don't read proper scientific analysis of papers that are published. They continuously repeat the 97% mantra which has so embarrassingly been shown to be a crock of shyte, and promulgate the Goreist religious doctrine of "scare the folks" with mendacious balderdash.




Yes Wayne you are 100% correct.

This is the Green/Labor socialist left wing modus operandi.......screech their propaganda often enough and the naive will believe it,  but the average person with any commonsense are now starting to see through their lies and BS.


----------



## basilio (16 July 2014)

> Obviously, basilio, the Greens and the ABC don't read proper scientific analysis of papers that are published.  Wayne L




Oh I have obviously missed a very significant scientific analysis that clearly disputes the current understandings on climate change.

Could you please refer me to the papers that mange to overturn the current overwhelming scientific belief that we have rapid global warming and that human produced greenhouse gases are the primary driver.  Given that it is a 'proper scientific analysis' I expect it would have been peer reviewed and published in a reputable science journal. 

Thanks.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2014)

basilio said:


> Oh I have obviously missed a very significant scientific analysis that clearly disputes the current understandings on climate change.
> 
> Could you please refer me to the papers that mange to overturn the current overwhelming scientific belief that we have rapid global warming and that human produced greenhouse gases are the primary driver.  Given that it is a 'proper scientific analysis' I expect it would have been peer reviewed and published in a reputable science journal.
> 
> Thanks.




There is a fallacy in your question.

There is an overwhelming scientific belief in the empirical observations, these show a warming trend since the end of the little ice age.

There is overwhelming scientific belief that increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will cause warming, all things being equal.

There is no overwhelming scientific belief regarding feedbacks, degree of anthropogenic or natural drivers. There are various hypotheses regarding these.

There is no overwhelming belief in the continuation of any trend. The models have failed to predict, illustrating that our understanding of climate is in its infancy.

There is no evidence that weather events are more extreme, as asserted in parliament yesterday by the hysterical lying Greens, or that any other predictions of Armageddon have any validity.

There is no overwhelming belief that climate change will ultimately be dangerous to humankind.

Ergo, the answer is in the completed studies themselves, rather than studies refuting studies (apart from analysis of Cooke et al which has been shredded into tiny pieces). Apart from a very few end time Apocalyptic nutters, very few papers make much of a statement.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2014)

But this thread is about the ABC, so let's take it to the appropriate thread.


----------



## Tink (28 July 2014)

We have a 'promise tracker' now, I wonder why?
Give me one guess....

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


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2014)

Tink said:


> We have a 'promise tracker' now, I wonder why?
> Give me one guess....
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/promisetracker/




To inform the public perhaps ?

Why else ?


----------



## Tink (28 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> To inform the public perhaps ?
> 
> Why else ?




Fair enough, I just don't remember them doing this before.


----------



## noco (28 July 2014)

Why is the ABC allowed to broad cast this Al-Jazeera show twice per day.....this organization has very close ties  to Hamas..

It is time the government intervened. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ments/why_is_the_abc_broadcasting_al_jazeera/


----------



## IFocus (28 July 2014)

Email doing the rounds  


Subject: Fwd: Balanced Report



A Harley biker is riding by the zoo in Chester, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lions' cage.

Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her inside, under the eyes of her screaming parents.

The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch.

Whimpering from the pain, the lion jumps back, letting go of the girl and the biker brings  her to her terrified parents who thank him endlessly.

A reporter has watched the whole event. The reporter, addressing the Harley rider, says:  "Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I've seen a man do in my whole life."

The Harley rider replies: "Why, it was nothing, really; the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger and acted as I felt right.."

The reporter says,
"Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a Daily Mail journalist and tomorrow's paper will have this story on the front page. So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?"

The biker replies:
"I'm an SAS soldier just returned from Afghanistan and a Labour party supporter."

The journalist leaves.

The following morning the biker buys the paper to see news of his actions and reads, on the front page: 









SAS SOLDIER ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH


That pretty much sums up the media's approach to the news these days.



And this thread


----------



## noco (28 July 2014)

Tink said:


> We have a 'promise tracker' now, I wonder why?
> Give me one guess....
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/promisetracker/




Give you one guess?

You whistle and I will point.


----------



## drsmith (28 July 2014)

noco said:


> Give you one guess?
> 
> You whistle and I will point.



I like this one. 



> Promise check: No-one who arrives illegally by boat will receive permanent residency






> This promise is broken




That's because at every turn, Labor who made such a mess out of our border security when they were in office are blocking the government in the senate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-27/permanent-residency-promise-check/5506122


----------



## noco (2 August 2014)

The ABC have been all over the latest boat arrival with 157 from India but said very little about the 50,000 arrivals under Green/Labor and the 1250 who  drowned at sea.

The ABC are making a big deal about the children in detention which they claim the HRC report abuse of children in detention. The number of kids in detention  has been reduced from some 2000 to 800 in just 9 months.

They are showing their true colors in hoping the Government fails with SBO.

Time for the ABC to show some balance and stop the bias. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...alition-no-slack/story-fn8qlm5e-1227010618655


----------



## Julia (2 August 2014)

Agree essentially with the above.
At the same time, I only today got around to watching last Sunday's "Insiders" and was pleasantly surprised at the usually anti-government journalists being very even-handed and even full of praise for the efforts of Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop over the MH17 matter.

Even the intervew with Tanya Plibersek was fair in terms of both the questions by Kelly and the answers, with minimal point scoring.


----------



## noco (2 August 2014)

Julia said:


> Agree essentially with the above.
> At the same time, I only today got around to watching last Sunday's "Insiders" and was pleasantly surprised at the usually anti-government journalists being very even-handed and even full of praise for the efforts of Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop over the MH17 matter.
> 
> Even the intervew with Tanya Plibersek was fair in terms of both the questions by Kelly and the answers, with minimal point scoring.




I guess they had very little choice but show praise on the effort Abbott and Bishop have demonstrated......I would say the ABC would have looked pretty callous if they hadn't.

As far as Plibersk is concerned, she avoided showing much gratitude at all IMO.


----------



## dutchie (11 August 2014)

The ABC is political and out of touch.

The Australian shows a child holding up a severed head on its front page.
The ABC News shows cartoons mocking Australia's response to terrorism.
Pathetic.


----------



## Julia (26 August 2014)

This, from Radio National's "Big Ideas", is a very good panel discussion on Bias in the Australian Media.
The facilitator is Paul Barclay, one of the ABC's front people who is actually calm and reasonable, rather than deliberately inflammatory and provocative.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/bias-in-the-australian-media/5688912


Tom Switzer
    journalist
    former Australian editor of 'The Spectator' magazine
    research associate, US Studies Centre.

Dr John Harrison
    academic, University of Queensland, School of Journalism and Communication.

Sharri Markson
    journalist
    Media Editor, 'The Australian' newspaper

Dr Andrew Dodd
    journalist
    academic, Swinburne University of Technology. 

Ms Markson in particular provides some quite astonishing examples of tweets from some very publicly known ABC journalists, including one where the journalist posts a photo of herself wearing a Tshirt that says 
"F.  Tony Abbott".


----------



## Knobby22 (26 August 2014)

Julia said:


> Ms Markson in particular provides some quite astonishing examples of tweets from some very publicly known ABC journalists, including one where the journalist posts a photo of herself wearing a Tshirt that says
> "F.  Tony Abbott".




Unbelievable if true.
I only managed to find this on the internet, which still is wrong.


ABC anti-Abbott bias? - from The Australian

AND they say there is no anti-government bias at the ABC. ABC newsreader and Business Today presenter, Whitney Fitzsimmons has posted a photograph on her Facebook page of a woman wearing a charming T-shirt that reads “F. . k Tony Abbott.”

She also likes the comments underneath the photograph, which read “simple yet effective” and “Oddly, Miranda Devine has the same shirt.” This matter was a tough one for ABC’s new chief spinner, Nick Leys, who took two days to come back to Diary when we asked him how the ABC could provide objective and balanced coverage of politics when their journalists posted material like this on Facebook. Finally he said, “While she did take the photograph and post it to her personal Facebook page, she in no way endorses the views on display.” Aaah. If only there was an unendorse button on Facebook.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 August 2014)

> This, from Radio National's "Big Ideas", is a very good panel discussion on Bias in the Australian Media.
> The facilitator is Paul Barclay, one of the ABC's front people who is actually calm and reasonable, rather than deliberately inflammatory and provocative.




Interesting discussion.

And you heard it on ... The ABC.

I wonder if the commercial channels ever do a searching public review of their own processes.

As for that silly Murdoch woman who thinks the ABC is a rampant communist propagandist...

Mark Scott sat next to Clive Palmer !! WOW, that makes Clive a Greeny !

Give us a break


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Mark Scott sat next to Clive Palmer !! WOW, that makes Clive a Greeny !



Didn't you know ?

Uncle Clive is a greenie.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 August 2014)

drsmith said:


> Didn't you know ?
> 
> Uncle Clive is a greenie.




Only for show, for dough he is a miner.


----------



## Julia (26 August 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Interesting discussion.
> 
> And you heard it on ... The ABC.
> 
> I wonder if the commercial channels ever do a searching public review of their own processes.



It wasn't just about their own processes.  It was equally about Fairfax, the Murdoch papers also



> As for that silly Murdoch woman who thinks the ABC is a rampant communist propagandist...



I don't understand why you feel it necessary to misrepresent what someone said.  The reason I put up the link is because, for the most part, all four participants presented their views in fairly reasonable terms.  I do not recall her saying that the ABC is a rampant communist propagandist at all, and I listened closely.  She did,  however, make some very reasonable points, one of which I mentioned earlier and which Knobby followed up.



> Mark Scott sat next to Clive Palmer !! WOW, that makes Clive a Greeny !



My interpretation of such seating arrangements is that they are both absolutely self interested and egocentric and would manipulate any situation to their own best advantage.

Mr Palmer is whatever his audience de jour demands.  If he wants to appeal to the Greens, he will happily trot out Al Gore.   Just in the last week he has called the Chinese mongrels and bastards, quite possibly jeopardising our trade relations with China, yet today he has belatedly made a grovelling apology to the Chinese embassy.

Only the ultra gullible will be taken in by the many faces of Palmer.


----------



## sptrawler (26 August 2014)

Julia said:


> It wasn't just about their own processes.  It was equally about Fairfax, the Murdoch papers also
> 
> 
> I don't understand why you feel it necessary to misrepresent what someone said.  The reason I put up the link is because, for the most part, all four participants presented their views in fairly reasonable terms.  I do not recall her saying that the ABC is a rampant communist propagandist at all, and I listened closely.  She did,  however, make some very reasonable points, one of which I mentioned earlier and which Knobby followed up.
> ...




Today Palmer, after many days of saying they will negotiate a position on the GP co payment, pulls the pin.

The man is a goose, everyone who works pays when they go to the doctor.

Australia, is going to find itself in the $hit much quicker than people think.

Just look at W.A's credit rating lol, they are the diamond in the crown.


----------



## sptrawler (26 August 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Today Palmer, after many days of saying they will negotiate a position on the GP co payment, pulls the pin.
> 
> The man is a goose, everyone who works pays when they go to the doctor.
> 
> ...




Actually one has to wonder if Palmers, stalling and sending Australia into further fiscal disarray isn't playing into Chinas hands.

They will pick up more of our distressed companies, as our fiscal situation deteriorates.

Strap yourselves in everyone.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2014)

> I don't understand why you feel it necessary to misrepresent what someone said.




She said the ABC deliberately ran a left wing agenda (ok not quite communist I just put that in for noco), but admitted that her paper deliberately ran a right wing agenda.

She made a silly connection by associating who Mark Scott decided to sit next to at a dinner as  having some deeper political relationship. Rupert Murdoch or his lieutenants had dinner or met with Tony Abbott quite often before the last election, what do we make of that ?



> My interpretation of such seating arrangements is that they are both absolutely self interested and egocentric and would manipulate any situation to their own best advantage.




That seems a pretty extreme projection of a simple seating arrangement. Palmer, despite his foolishness is an interesting and entertaining person to listen to. Given a choice I think most people would rather sit next to him at a party than say Cory Bernadi.



> Only the ultra gullible will be taken in by the many faces of Palmer.




No doubt true, but Clive has a thread all to himself, this is about the ABC, or media in general if we want to widen the discussion.


----------



## Ijustnewit (27 August 2014)

The ABC has dig up another piece of mud on Tony Abbott this morning , running on their ABC news website as headline news.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-27/abbotts-office-denies-pm-misused-travel-entitlements/5699262

Oh boy they just don't give up.


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2014)

Ijustnewit said:


> The ABC has dig up another piece of mud on Tony Abbott this morning , running on their ABC news website as headline news.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-27/abbotts-office-denies-pm-misused-travel-entitlements/5699262
> 
> Oh boy they just don't give up.



The source is either some over enthusiastic reporting from Fairfax or a white ant(s) in the party room.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ott-bill-shorten/story-fn59niix-1227038465309

We'll have to wait to see how it plays out but these things are usually the latter. It will no doubt be front and centre at QT today.

Interesting contribution from Uncle Clive,



> Crossbench MP Clive Palmer said the Prime Minister should have access to taxpayer-funded travel to wherever he chooses.
> 
> "He is the Prime Minister of this country, and if he thinks he needs to talk to people in Melbourne for any purpose, he should be entitled to do it," Mr Palmer said.
> 
> "He works for us, 100 per cent of his time, as Prime Minister."


----------



## Ijustnewit (27 August 2014)

drsmith said:


> The source is either some over enthusiastic reporting from Fairfax or a white ant(s) in the party room.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ott-bill-shorten/story-fn59niix-1227038465309
> 
> ...




Apparently he stopped off to visit a Cancer Clinic , The ABC is playing it up big time . The Headline story on the 12:00 pm TV News as well. They can do better , it was Cancer Centre not the Crown Casino for god's sake.
Would they have made such a big deal if it was to visit a renewable energy centre.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2014)

Ijustnewit said:


> Apparently he stopped off to visit a Cancer Clinic , The ABC is playing it up big time . The Headline story on the 12:00 pm TV News as well. They can do better , it was Cancer Centre not the Crown Casino for god's sake.
> Would they have made such a big deal if it was to visit a renewable energy centre.






> The ABC has been told that Prime Minister Tony Abbott yesterday told colleagues that he visited a Melbourne cancer clinic so he could charge taxpayers for the trip to the city.
> 
> On Monday Mr Abbott had travelled from Canberra to attend a private function in Melbourne.
> 
> ...




So it seems an MP can go to as many "private functions" as they like, and claim TA for it as long as they have a token public appearance as well.


----------



## Julia (27 August 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> She said the ABC deliberately ran a left wing agenda (ok not quite communist I just put that in for noco), but admitted that her paper deliberately ran a right wing agenda.



What you actually said was


> .... the ABC is a rampant communist propagandist...



which is nothing like her factual statement that, yes, Fairfax and the ABC largely prosecute a Left focus, just as The Australian eg leans to the right. And no one contradicted her.  This is what was refreshing:  instead of furiously denying any bias, all participants appeared to agree that of course it existed.

This is what I mean about misrepresenting what is said.
I put up the link because

1.  I found the program interesting, well balanced, and always admire the even handed facilitation of Paul Barclay.

2.  It was an example of (for the most part, ie some of John Harrison's remarks were less than moderate) how good political discussion can exist when intelligent people decline indulgence in petty point scoring in favour of genuine discussion.

3.  A vague hope that it might inspire some similar discussion, with a bit of objectivity, on this forum.

Clearly I failed.
Might as well not bother trying, especially when there's also some personally directed gratuitous uncivility thrown in by a different individual.



> No doubt true, but Clive has a thread all to himself, this is about the ABC, or media in general if we want to widen the discussion.



It was you who introduced Mr Palmer into this particular part of the discussion.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2014)

> Clearly I failed.
> Might as well not bother trying, especially when there's also some personally directed gratuitous uncivility thrown in by a different individual.




I think it was a revealing interview, so your posting it was worthwhile even though it hasn't generated a great deal of discussion.

Yes, I did bring up Clive Palmer because he was mentioned in the interview, and I did not mention his views, only that it was said that Mark Scott decided to sit next to him. I thought it was petty of the Murdoch journalist to insinuate an insidious relationship between the two, but I suppose we can't expect junior journos to have the Insight of a Laurie Oakes, Paul Kelly or  Tony Jones. 

The ABC seems to be populated with a lot of young and seemingly naive journos these days, and although I cast no aspersions on their competence one gets the feeling that the more hard bitten scribes are either sitting behind a desk or have moved on to other organisations, leaving a cynicism vacuum on the frontline of the ABC. There appears to be few Paul Harveys, Peter Luck's, Gerald Stones, Andrew Ollies, or dare I say Mike Carltons coming up.


----------



## IFocus (27 August 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Just look at W.A's credit rating lol, they are the diamond in the crown.





On the Liberal party's watch Labor left them a set of books in good shape........................where is your condemnation


----------



## noco (27 August 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it was a revealing interview, so your posting it was worthwhile even though it hasn't generated a great deal of discussion.
> 
> Yes, I did bring up Clive Palmer because he was mentioned in the interview, and I did not mention his views, only that it was said that Mark Scott decided to sit next to him. I thought it was petty of the Murdoch journalist to insinuate an insidious relationship between the two, but I suppose we can't expect junior journos to have the Insight of a Laurie Oakes, Paul Kelly or  Tony Jones.
> 
> The ABC seems to be populated with a lot of young and seemingly naive journos these days, and although I cast no aspersions on their competence one gets the feeling that the more hard bitten scribes are either sitting behind a desk or have moved on to other organisations, leaving a cynicism vacuum on the frontline of the ABC. There appears to be few Paul Harveys, Peter Luck's, Gerald Stones, Andrew Ollies, or dare I say Mike Carltons coming up.




Those young naive journos have all been indoctrinated with the same Fabian gramophone needle.

Hopefully things will start to change with the new board who does the staff appointments....we may now start to see a bit more balance in reporting from unbiased journos like Harvey, Luck, Stone, Ollie......I won't include Mike Carlton.


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2014)

Ijustnewit said:


> Apparently he stopped off to visit a Cancer Clinic , The ABC is playing it up big time . The Headline story on the 12:00 pm TV News as well. They can do better , it was Cancer Centre not the Crown Casino for god's sake.
> Would they have made such a big deal if it was to visit a renewable energy centre.



As a story it seems to have withered as the day has gone on. 

Nothing about it from Labor in QT today.


----------



## Tisme (27 August 2014)

Ijustnewit said:


> Apparently he stopped off to visit a Cancer Clinic , The ABC is playing it up big time . The Headline story on the 12:00 pm TV News as well. They can do better , it was Cancer Centre not the Crown Casino for god's sake.
> Would they have made such a big deal if it was to visit a renewable energy centre.




Gotta be careful when Claudius admits petty theft as it usually means he and his cohorts are baiting Marcellus to announce something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Invariably Claudius has a bucket of fish ready for the challenge.

I doubt the LNP have blundered on the fountain of truth and honesty, unless  it's been hiding in the Cancer Centre all this time.


----------



## Julia (31 August 2014)

I've found both last Monday's Q & A and today's "The Insiders" very reasonable both in terms of the moderation and the relatively respectful views of the panellists.  Q & A in particular showed the quality of Gareth Evans and Paul Kelly.

Since Tanya Plibersek has been Shadow Minister for Immigration, the radio interviews I've heard with her have been pretty awful:  she has sounded uncertain, hesitant, out of her depth.  But on today's "Insiders" she seemed like a different person, competent, articulate and (wow!) sincere.   Hope she can keep it up.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 August 2014)

Julia said:


> I've found both last Monday's Q & A and today's "The Insiders" very reasonable both in terms of the moderation and the relatively respectful views of the panellists.  Q & A in particular showed the quality of Gareth Evans and Paul Kelly.
> 
> Since Tanya Plibersek has been Shadow Minister for Immigration, the radio interviews I've heard with her have been pretty awful:  she has sounded uncertain, hesitant, out of her depth.  But on today's "Insiders" she seemed like a different person, competent, articulate and (wow!) sincere.   Hope she can keep it up.




Yes, she was ok. Pity Keating didn't show as Cassidy advertised he would on Friday's News Breakfast.


----------



## drsmith (1 September 2014)

Julia said:


> Since Tanya Plibersek has been Shadow Minister for Immigration, the radio interviews I've heard with her have been pretty awful:  she has sounded uncertain, hesitant, out of her depth.  But on today's "Insiders" she seemed like a different person, competent, articulate and (wow!) sincere.   Hope she can keep it up.



While one can understand one side of politics not wanting to offer praise or even acknowledgement to the other, mother Plibersek's comments re-Julie Bishop at the end of that interview showed her true nature.


----------



## noco (1 September 2014)

drsmith said:


> While one can understand one side of politics not wanting to offer praise or even acknowledgement to the other, mother Plibersek's comments re-Julie Bishop at the end of that interview showed her true nature.




Yes Doc, she was very reluctant to give Julie Bishop any credit for the way Bishop was going about her role as Foreign Minister.....Could imagine Plibersek as Foreign Minister.....she would be  worse than Bob Carr who was a bloody embarrassment.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

noco said:


> .she would be  worse than Bob Carr who was a bloody embarrassment.




In what way was Carr an embarrassment ?


----------



## Julia (1 September 2014)

drsmith said:


> While one can understand one side of politics not wanting to offer praise or even acknowledgement to the other, mother Plibersek's comments re-Julie Bishop at the end of that interview showed her true nature.



I don't specifically remember anything she said about Julie Bishop.  What was it?
Perhaps I just take for granted and mentally dismiss the apparently obligatory dissing of their opposite number.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

Julia said:


> I don't specifically remember anything she said about Julie Bishop.  What was it?
> Perhaps I just take for granted and mentally dismiss the apparently obligatory dissing of their opposite number.




Pliberseck was responding to a question saying that the US Ambassador had heaped a lot of praise on Julie Bishop.Pliberseck simply replied that the US ambassador was a good diplomat, she made no assertions against Bishop.


----------



## drsmith (1 September 2014)

Julia said:


> I don't specifically remember anything she said about Julie Bishop.  What was it?






> BARRIE CASSIDY: Now, finally, the United States Ambassador here, John Berry, said this of Julie Bishop, the Foreign Minister, this week that she is, "In the top tier of the most effective and capable Foreign ministers in the world. She's impressive in every way." That's very high praise.
> 
> TANYA PLIBERSEK: And John Berry's a terrific diplomat.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2014/s4077805.htm


----------



## noco (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> In what way was Carr an embarrassment ?




How about this for starters?


national
LATEST IN NATIONAL
Insulation report reveals ‘dysfunction’
QLD_CM_NEWS_INSULATION_15MAY14(2)

    1 video

Iraq: Are we ‘creeping’ into war?
Iraq: Are we ‘creeping’ into war?

    9 comments
    1 video

Parliament in Iraq ‘dogfight’
Parliament in Iraq ‘dogfight’

    1 video

The stories you need to know today
The stories you need to know today

    1 video

Diaries of a first-class tosser: former foreign minister Bob Carr’s moaning set to insult leaders around the globe

    5 months ago April 10, 2014 10:39AM

Bob Carr resigns from politics
Bob Carr: Diaries of a first-class tosser

Former foreign minister Bob Carr in first-class jammies. Source: DailyTelegraph

FORMER foreign minister Bob Carr was last night labeled “arrogant” and “foolish” for risking diplomatic ties after leaked extracts of his new diaries revealed him complaining about taxpayer-funded first and business class travel and questioning whether top US leaders had plastic surgery.

Mr Carr complains about inedible food and a lack of pyjamas in business class where seats were akin to “trans-Atlantic slave trade”, a lack of subtitles on an Opera film in first class and even the perk of getting an upgrade to first because he could only book business as “a middle-power foreign minister”.

In other extracts already dubbed “Bridget Carr’s Diary”, the exercised-obsessed former NSW premier reveals during a trip to Cairo that his ambition was to “have a concave abdomen defined by deep-cut obliques”.

He also writes that he “cannot feel humble” after attending a G20 leaders meeting with US President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin in his last act in the job last September.

“Interested, curious, of course. Just not humble,” he writes in Diary of a Foreign Minister.

Mr Carr also muses about the possibility of plastic surgery work for US Senator John McCain (“younger and more sparkle-eyed than I might have expected”) and US Secretary of State John Kerry (“I noticed something about the skin”).

http://www.news.com.au/national/dia...around-the-globe/story-fncynjr2-1226879387117


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

noco said:


> How about this for starters?




The usual media beat up of a tongue in cheek book. I'm sure it caused us no end of embarrassment, not.


----------



## noco (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The usual media beat up of a tongue in cheek book. I'm sure it caused us no end of embarrassment, not.




Rumpy, you did not disappoint me with your reply...it was exactly what I expected from you when you don't like something which is factual and true.

If you want some more on this grub just google it and DYOR.


----------



## Julia (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Pliberseck was responding to a question saying that the US Ambassador had heaped a lot of praise on Julie Bishop.Pliberseck simply replied that the US ambassador was a good diplomat, she made no assertions against Bishop.



Perhaps so, but when in the full context of the quote provided by drsmith, her response was snarky, ungenerous, and implied that the praise directed toward Ms Bishop was undeserved and constituted nothing more than a suck-up from the diplomat.

Typical, however, which is why I probably just filtered it out.

So usual is such mean spirited commentary by both sides, that the sensibly worded support expressed by Bill Shorten for the government's decision on Iraq really stands out.  If he could just apply a little of that same sense to being prepared to negotiate on the Budget, the electorate might feel a bit less depressed about the country's future.


----------



## overhang (1 September 2014)

drsmith said:


> BARRIE CASSIDY: Now, finally, the United States Ambassador here, John Berry, said this of Julie Bishop, the Foreign Minister, this week that she is, "In the top tier of the most effective and capable Foreign ministers in the world. She's impressive in every way." That's very high praise.
> 
> TANYA PLIBERSEK: And John Berry's a terrific diplomat.
> 
> ...




I don't really think much of Tanya, thought she made a poor health minister but that is quite critical to question the way she handled that.  I don't think I've ever seen a politician compliment the opposing member on the job they're doing. I think when no cheap shots are made as per the above interview would be the most diplomatic we could hope for.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

> If he could just apply a little of that same sense to being prepared to negotiate on the Budget, the electorate might feel a bit less depressed about the country's future.




The same words could equally be applied to the other side.

"No surprises, no excuses" were Tony Abbott's words. There was no mandate for the GP co-payment and many other budget measures. I see no reason why Labor should support measures for which the Coalition have no mandate.


----------



## Julia (1 September 2014)

OK Rumpole.  My comments were essentially directed to both sides of politics, an example offered of Plibersek's cattiness as opposed to Shorten's reasonable approach.
It would be good if you'd not regard every comment by every poster as a partisan political attempt at point scoring.

  FWIW my suggestion was that the opposition should* negotiate* on the Budget, not that they should necessarily 100% support all of it.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

Julia said:


> It would be good if you'd not regard every comment by every poster as a partisan political attempt at point scoring.
> .




I don't, but after being bombarded with platitudes about Fabians by some, occasionally the knee jerk response kicks in.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2014)

noco said:


> Rumpy, you did not disappoint me with your reply...it was exactly what I expected from you when you don't like something which is factual and true.
> 
> If you want some more on this grub just google it and DYOR.




Carr has never shied away from self deprecating humour; his guilt is that he over estimates the residual humour of what was once a larrikin country. Somewhere around the infamous PC wars of the late eighties our culture changed to a predominantly spiteful one it seems.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The same words could equally be applied to the other side.
> 
> "No surprises, no excuses" were Tony Abbott's words. There was no mandate for the GP co-payment and many other budget measures. I see no reason why Labor should support measures for which the Coalition have no mandate.




My local representative was voted in with a mandate to represent his constituents wishes... no more no less. My only lament is that there wasn't a X dresser to vote for last time around.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2014)

Tisme said:


> My local representative was voted in with a mandate to represent his constituents wishes... no more no less. My only lament is that there wasn't a X dresser to vote for last time around.




So which X Dressers did you vote for previously ?


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> So which X Dressers did you vote for previously ?




Tamarra Tonite (sp) was the X dresser, then there was the stripper who had the last name as the sitting Fed rep...she was too hot not to tick off on...my mojo got a kick start that weekend.


----------



## noco (1 September 2014)

Tisme said:


> Tamarra Tonite (sp) was the X dresser, then there was the stripper who had the last name as the sitting Fed rep...she was too hot not to tick off on...my mojo got a kick start that weekend.




Is she the same stripper Kevvie put $100 note down  her knickers?


----------



## noco (1 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> In what way was Carr an embarrassment ?




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...st-class-foreign-minister-20140501-37jzs.html


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2014)

noco said:


> Is she the same stripper Kevvie put $100 note down  her knickers?




I was so impressed by Kevin I went to that place in New York, but I whimped out when I saw it was so exposed to observers in the deserted part of the city. Besides I'm not that trusting of a business that takes $10k off the credit card on entry as security against drinks, cigars and women.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2014)

I don't know about the ABC being political, but it's certainly getting dumbed down.

News24 breakfast spent a disproportionate amount of the show lamenting the death of Joan Rivers, an American comedian I had barely heard of and who apparently was noteworthy for being foul and obnoxious.

OK, a news item maybe , but not repeated 5 minute eulogies every half hour.


----------



## IFocus (5 September 2014)

OK OK I get it I am sick and tied of the political agenda of the ABC.

Breakfast radio I have to listen to a former Liberal party MP

At nigh watching the Drum hosted by the wife of the Liberal party NSW premier.

Then  7.30 reporter best mates with federal liberal party MPs.


Where will it all end?


----------



## wayneL (5 September 2014)

IFocus said:


> OK OK I get it I am sick and tied of the political agenda of the ABC.
> 
> Breakfast radio I have to listen to a former Liberal party MP
> 
> ...




A bit of balance perhaps?


----------



## DB008 (5 September 2014)

Tisme said:


> I was so impressed by Kevin I went to that place in New York, but I whimped out when I saw it was so exposed to observers in the deserted part of the city. Besides I'm not that trusting of a business that takes $10k off the credit card on entry as security against drinks, cigars and women.




Imagine if our current P.M. did what Kevin 747 did (re:Strip-club) ? Wow. The ABC would go into overdrive/meltdown...

But Kevin 747 did it, it's ok...


----------



## sptrawler (5 September 2014)

IFocus said:


> OK OK I get it I am sick and tied of the political agenda of the ABC.
> 
> Breakfast radio I have to listen to a former Liberal party MP
> 
> ...




I suppose when the ABC realise they are funded by the taxpayers, therefore don't have to win over or influence a percieved audience.
Where news and current affairs are concerned, they should just focus on reporting the facts, and avoid personal beliefs and biases.
The Government pays for the ABC, the ABC doesn't know which party will win office and therefore be their employer.
It is dumb management that picks a side to back, that isn't what they are paid to do, they're paid to provide accurate unbiased news.

Going left wing or right wing, will end up in tears for the ABC. 
We aren't in a fiscal or technological space that will allow *any* Government to throw money at a hostile Government funded service.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2014)

DB008 said:


> Imagine if our current P.M. did what Kevin 747 did (re:Strip-club) ? Wow. The ABC would go into overdrive/meltdown...
> 
> But Kevin 747 did it, it's ok...




Who said it was OK when KRudd went to the strip club ?

All the media gave him a roasting as I recall.

If TA did it, he would deservedly get a roasting too, being a so-called Christian like Rudd, and the female lobby would no doubt get into him for misogyny.


----------



## DB008 (5 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Who said it was OK when KRudd went to the strip club ?
> 
> All the media gave him a roasting as I recall.
> 
> If TA did it, he would deservedly get a roasting too, being a so-called Christian like Rudd, and the female lobby would no doubt get into him for misogyny.




Every bloke l've spoken to has said 'no biggie' regarding the strip club incident. I remember that shows like 'The Project' on Channel 10 even had a laugh about it.


----------



## IFocus (6 September 2014)

DB008 said:


> Kevin 747




Just out of interest Abbott has actually done more air miles as PM than Rudd in the same space of time but you wont hear that from the Liberal daily news.


----------



## IFocus (6 September 2014)

wayneL said:


> A bit of balance perhaps?




There all ways have been, as posted some where here before more ABC staff have resigned and gone to or come from the conservative side of politics.

Most here don't get that the ABC  *is* the most conservative media organisation in Australia as opposed to any other of the media organizations in Australia that are all agenda driven trying to fill or find a space for advertising revenue or a hook to direct punters to its programming.  

I use the word conservative in its true meaning.


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2014)

IFocus said:


> There all ways have been, as posted some where here before more ABC staff have resigned and gone to or come from the conservative side of politics.
> 
> Most here don't get that the ABC  *is* the most conservative media organisation in Australia as opposed to any other of the media organizations in Australia that are all agenda driven trying to fill or find a space for advertising revenue or a hook to direct punters to its programming.
> 
> I use the word conservative in its true meaning.



What is the true meaning of conservative in your book?


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2014)

wayneL said:


> What is the true meaning of conservative in your book?




Risk adverse ?


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Risk adverse ?




Are you IFocus?


----------



## overhang (6 September 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I suppose when the ABC realise they are funded by the taxpayers, therefore don't have to win over or influence a percieved audience.
> Where news and current affairs are concerned, they should just focus on reporting the facts, and avoid personal beliefs and biases.
> The Government pays for the ABC, the ABC doesn't know which party will win office and therefore be their employer.
> It is dumb management that picks a side to back, that isn't what they are paid to do, they're paid to provide accurate unbiased news.
> ...




I would argue the ABC takes the humanitarian side which I see as their biggest issue.  The problem is when you politicise humanitarian issues it normally is further in line with the left ideology than the right.  Take issues of global warming, asylum seekers, gay marriage and give it plenty of coverage and it's difficult to come across impartial but imo if you looked at their reporting on fiscal matters it would be fair and balanced.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2014)

wayneL said:


> Are you IFocus?




Are you Joe Blow ?

If not, kindly don't tell me when I can or can't comment

Thanks


----------



## Julia (6 September 2014)

IFocus said:


> Just out of interest Abbott has actually done more air miles as PM than Rudd in the same space of time but you wont hear that from the Liberal daily news.



Actually, that very fact is in today's Weekend Australian.  
I don't care how many air miles any PM does if the result is that he is effective overseas.   Rudd's globetrotting always seemed to be more about him and his future prospects than about Australia.


----------



## noco (6 September 2014)

Julia said:


> Actually, that very fact is in today's Weekend Australian.
> I don't care how many air miles any PM does if the result is that he is effective overseas.   Rudd's globetrotting always seemed to be more about him and his future prospects than about Australia.




+1 Julia...All of Rudd's Global trotting was about Rudd seeking support for his bid as UN General Secretary.


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Are you Joe Blow ?
> 
> If not, kindly don't tell me when I can or can't comment
> 
> Thanks




The question was, paraphrased for your edification, what is IFocus' definition of conservative?

As you quoted me in your reply, I seek clarification as to your identification. Again, are you IFocus? If so I will respond to that contextual absurdity (notwithstanding the possible Terms of Use violation).  If not, I will await IFocus' reply.   

And just to be clear, you can spout whatever nonsense you like, so long as it is within the ASF code of conduct.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2014)

wayneL said:


> The question was, paraphrased for your edification, what is IFocus' definition of conservative?
> 
> As you quoted me in your reply, I seek clarification as to your identification. Again, are you IFocus? If so I will respond to that contextual absurdity (notwithstanding the possible Terms of Use violation).  If not, I will await IFocus' reply.
> 
> And just to be clear, you can spout whatever nonsense you like, so long as it is within the ASF code of conduct.




I'm not IFocus so I gave you my definition of "conservative". If you are only interested in what IFocus thinks, feel free to ignore my observation, as I frequently do to yours.


----------



## IFocus (6 September 2014)

wayneL said:


> What is the true meaning of conservative in your book?




Should have qualified non political, stole this from the net.

averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.
"they were very conservative in their outlook"
synonyms:	traditionalist, traditional, conventional, orthodox, stable, old-fashioned, dyed-in-the-wool, unchanging, hidebound;
cautious, prudent, careful, safe, timid, unadventurous, unenterprising, set in one's ways;
moderate, middle-of-the-road, temperate;
informalstick in the mud


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2014)

IFocus said:


> Should have qualified non political, stole this from the net.
> 
> averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.
> "they were very conservative in their outlook"
> ...




Cheers thanks IF


----------



## dutchie (8 September 2014)

Virginia (Lib) Vitriol bitterly disappointed this morning that Ashby saga was not on the front pages of the morning newspapers.


----------



## Julia (14 September 2014)

Very rational and reasonable commentary by the panel today.  
The co-operation offered by Labor to the government on the ISIS situation was cynically and accurately dissected.


----------



## noco (27 September 2014)

The ABC shows bias to the left wing again.....They just don't seem to learn.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|section|homepage|homepage&itmt=1411768478313


----------



## Calliope (27 September 2014)

noco said:


> The ABC shows bias to the left wing again.....They just don't seem to learn.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|section|homepage|homepage&itmt=1411768478313




Why shouldn't they be biased? After all they they make no apologies for being a left wing organisation. And they have a lot to be smug about. We, the taxayers fund them to preach a doctrine which is alien to the majority.

This funding is similar in a lot of ways to the millions we spend funding Muslim schools to indoctrinate their students in radical Islamic facism We pay them so much that they are able to syphon off millions to other radical Islamic institutions..

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-...-islamic-fascism/story-fnpdbcmu-1227069667028


----------



## SirRumpole (27 September 2014)

> We, the taxayers fund them to preach a doctrine which is alien to the majority.




Labor is still ahead on two party preferred polling, so where is your majority ?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/polling


----------



## Julia (27 September 2014)

noco said:


> The ABC shows bias to the left wing again.....They just don't seem to learn.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|section|homepage|homepage&itmt=1411768478313



That link goes to the reporting of the comments of a particular Islamic preacher.  How is that the ABC's left bias?   The exact same report appears in today's Weekend Australian.
Was I supposed to find a further link?  Read further down?


----------



## noco (27 September 2014)

Julia said:


> That link goes to the reporting of the comments of a particular Islamic preacher.  How is that the ABC's left bias?   The exact same report appears in today's Weekend Australian.
> Was I supposed to find a further link?  Read further down?




Julia, you are right....the problem was it hit the button on the wrong link....I generally check out the link before posting but I failed to do so on this occasion.

Here is the link relating to the ABC ....please do also read the sub links as well.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._unbalanced_it_is_now_a_public_safety_hazard/


----------



## Julia (27 September 2014)

OK, thanks.  I have Q & A recorded but haven't watched it yet.  Will tonight.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 September 2014)

The ABC is a safety hazard ?

What a load of red neck right wing cr@p from someone very qualified to make that sort of comment.

Not worth the time reading that baloney.


----------



## Julia (27 September 2014)

Julia said:


> OK, thanks.  I have Q & A recorded but haven't watched it yet.  Will tonight.




I watched this tonight.   It was entirely predictable in that the audience was stacked with muslims.  In terms of the panel, though, I found only the woman (Randa???? someone) with shoulder length hair, was vociferously unreasonable.   She should have been shut up and more time given to some of the others.

Mr Keenan, although nervous at first, warmed up and made a pretty decent fist of presenting the government's point of view and for the most part was supported by Labor's Mark Dreyfus who seems like a calm and fairly sensible individual.

The counter-terrorism expert (in what capacity we were not told) made some sound points.  Scott Ludlum from the Greens was as he always is:  articulate and expresses his party's point of view in a not too unreasonable way.

All up, it's a touchy, difficult subject, especially at the moment, and no one behaved in any way I'd not have expected with the exception of a weird young woman in the audience who asserted she had been visited several times by ASIO who had threatened to behead her and display her head in the streets, or some such violent description.

I'd be very, very surprised if ASIO would lay themselves open to anything so outlandish, and there didn't seem to be any positive response to her rant from either the audience or the panel.  

Was the ABC biased here?   Probably only in the stacking of the audience and in allowing the long haired muslim woman to rant on to the extent she did.
Others will, of course, see it differently.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2014)

> All up, it's a touchy, difficult subject, especially at the moment, and no one behaved in any way I'd not have expected with the exception of a weird young woman in the audience who asserted she had been visited several times by ASIO who had threatened to behead her and display her head in the streets, or some such violent description.




I think that if you look at that bit again, the lady was referring to the ADL (Australian Defence League), a nasty right wing hate group. She was referring to threats of violence against Muslims on their web site.

Tony Jones misheard her and thought she said ASIO. He corrected his mistake on the show.

Like you, I continue to be impressed by Scott Ludlum. Articulate and to the point. Pity he's a Fabian though.  Agreed about Mark Dreyfuss, sensible and restrained.


Some people think the ABC is biased when they try to present a balanced picture. The fact is that the majority of Muslims are feeling threatened and harassed by the actions of a few. I find that as objectionable as the actions of a few thugs who call themselves Muslims but are just criminals and hoodlums.

I agree that one of the panelists was allowed to dominate the discussion for too long. But the politicians usually try to do that too, nothing new there.


----------



## noco (28 September 2014)

I cannot believe the ABC did not know they were up to mischief on this occasion.....an out right breach of trust.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ails-of-his-home/story-fnihsrf2-1227072734209


----------



## Julia (28 September 2014)

Julie Bishop seems to go from strength to strength.  She answered all Barrie Cassidy's questions on today's "Insiders" politely and in reasonable detail, but desisted from what seems to have become the prevalent defensive position of almost grovelling to the interviewer.

She is personable, articulate and intelligent imo.   Leaves much of the rest of them for dead and, if the nation were to have the stomach for another female prime minister after the debacle that was Gillard, I'd guess in a few years Ms Bishop would be a good choice.

The panel's comments seemed fair and reasonable today to me.  Do others agree?


----------



## noco (28 September 2014)

Julia said:


> Julie Bishop seems to go from strength to strength.  She answered all Barrie Cassidy's questions on today's "Insiders" politely and in reasonable detail, but desisted from what seems to have become the prevalent defensive position of almost grovelling to the interviewer.
> 
> She is personable, articulate and intelligent imo.   Leaves much of the rest of them for dead and, if the nation were to have the stomach for another female prime minister after the debacle that was Gillard, I'd guess in a few years Ms Bishop would be a good choice.
> 
> The panel's comments seemed fair and reasonable today to me.  Do others agree?




Julie Bishop certainly had Barry Cassidy's measure and I agree she handled the interview very well in a similar fashion to Scott Morrison.

Cassidy tried his best to catch her out but without success.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2014)

noco said:


> Julie Bishop certainly had Barry Cassidy's measure and I agree she handled the interview very well in a similar fashion to Scott Morrison.
> 
> .




After the Lambie fiasco anything would be an improvement but Bishop is making a mark as a good communicator, probably the best they have at the moment as Turnbull is taking a back seat.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2014)

What do people think of this story ?

After all, we don't see Chinese reporters in Aboriginal communities reporting on the squalid conditions there.

Is reporting adversely on foreign countries  a proper function of a national media organisation in a democracy, or should we mind our own business ?
==============

Chinese embassy warns of 'wider implications' over Foreign Correspondent story on Xinjiang conflict





> Senior Chinese officials have warned the ABC there will be "wider implications" over tonight's Foreign Correspondent story about unrest in western China.
> 
> ABC China correspondent Stephen McDonell and cameraman Wayne McAllister recently travelled to China's western province of Xinjiang to investigate reports of conflict in the homeland of Turkic-speaking ethnic Uighurs.
> 
> ...


----------



## Logique (30 September 2014)

Julia said:


> Julie Bishop seems to go from strength to strength...if the nation were to have the stomach for another female prime minister after the debacle that was Gillard, I'd guess in a few years Ms Bishop would be a good choice...



Initially thought Julie a bit prim and proper, but I've become a fan.

She has risen above her colleague's intrigues and Labor's jibes, and now has a world profile. Her career currently going in the opposite direction to Joe Hockey's. 

We could do a lot worse. Team up with Scott Morrison, it would be a decent ticket.


----------



## banco (30 September 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> After the Lambie fiasco anything would be an improvement but Bishop is making a mark as a good communicator, probably the best they have at the moment as Turnbull is taking a back seat.




Foreign Affairs isn't such a tough gig as long as you parrot the right lines (see Alexander Downer). Let's see how she does with a messy domestic portfolio.


----------



## noco (30 September 2014)

Calliope said:


> Why shouldn't they be biased? After all they they make no apologies for being a left wing organisation. And they have a lot to be smug about. We, the taxayers fund them to preach a doctrine which is alien to the majority.
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-...-islamic-fascism/story-fnpdbcmu-1227069667028




So why are they a left wing organization?.....It is because the Green/Labor left wing socialist put them there just to control their propaganda.

Calliope, I believe if you check out their charter, they have to be impartial in their reporting and they are far removed from the contents and should be pulled into line....I cannot believe the present government has allowed their bias.


----------



## wayneL (30 September 2014)

Logique said:


> Initially thought Julie a bit prim and proper, but I've become a fan.
> 
> She has risen above her colleague's intrigues and Labor's jibes, and now has a world profile. Her career currently going in the opposite direction to Joe Hockey's.




Maybe she could be Australia's first >successful< female PM?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 September 2014)

Logique said:


> Initially thought Julie a bit prim and proper, but I've become a fan.
> 
> She has risen above her colleague's intrigues and Labor's jibes, and now has a world profile. Her career currently going in the opposite direction to Joe Hockey's.
> 
> We could do a lot worse. Team up with Scott Morrison, it would be a decent ticket.






wayneL said:


> Maybe she could be Australia's first >successful< female PM?




Anything is possible but I doubt if JB will become PM.

SM more likely.

And if we can get rid of this useless tradition of a Nat being Dep. PM, then Julie would be a good deputy to Scott.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2014)

banco said:


> Foreign Affairs isn't such a tough gig as long as you parrot the right lines (see Alexander Downer). Let's see how she does with a messy domestic portfolio.




Absolutely, wait untill she has to tell an Aussie, they have to pull in the belt.lol


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Absolutely, wait untill she has to tell an Aussie, they have to pull in the belt.lol




The ABC will have her on Q & A and lateline, with a full audience of people who will tell her why they shouldn't.

Shame they can't get an audience, that are prepared to pull in their belt, but that wouldn't be good viewing.

I would recommend, putting people like Tony Jones on a normal salary, then they could really feel for the causes they support.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2014)

sptrawler said:


> The ABC will have her on Q & A and lateline, with a full audience of people who will tell her why they shouldn't.
> 
> Shame they can't get an audience, that are prepared to pull in their belt, but that wouldn't be good viewing.
> 
> I would recommend, putting people like Tony Jones on a normal salary, then they could really feel for the causes they support.




Maybe if Tony Jones got an audience of "normal Australians".

You know the ones, those that pay their taxes, pay their bills, pay their childcare, pay their traffic fines, pay their electricity, pay their gas, pay their private health, put away money for their retirement.
Those that do it on a "normal wage".

It would be novel to see Tony do that, rather than have stacked audiences to controversial topics, it makes great viewing for the targeted audience.
However it seems like the main issues never get aired, and the fringe issues get a lot of tax payer funding.
I'm not saying they aren't important, but those who aren't on government handouts are just as important.IMO


----------



## Tisme (1 October 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Maybe if Tony Jones got an audience of "normal Australians".




I tend to agree with that idea. Instead of stacking with interest groups, it would be nice to see the reaction of Joe Average; sans a burka, sans a rainbow badge, etc.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 October 2014)

sptrawler said:
			
		

> It would be novel to see Tony do that, rather than have stacked audiences to controversial topics, it makes great viewing for the targeted audience.




Ah yes, well they display voting intention of the audience on the screen, and it's usually about 44% LNP, 38% Labor, 12% Greens, the rest Other.

So unless you are going to call the audience liars, how else are you going to ensure an "unstacked" audience.

As far as the Muslims I saw a few Muslims in the audience, the rest weren't, so I wouldn't say it was highly "stacked" .


----------



## noco (1 October 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Maybe if Tony Jones got an audience of "normal Australians".
> 
> You know the ones, those that pay their taxes, pay their bills, pay their childcare, pay their traffic fines, pay their electricity, pay their gas, pay their private health, put away money for their retirement.
> Those that do it on a "normal wage".
> ...




SP, it is all about control of the media by the Fabian indoctrinated Green/Labor left wing democratic socialists who want to spread their propaganda and at the same time do their best to discredit the Abbott Government.

Tony Jones, lies and cheats on every occasion.     he manipulates the whole show from start to finish.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 October 2014)

noco said:
			
		

> Tony Jones, lies and cheats on every occasion. he manipulates the whole show from start to finish.




I see extremism isn't limited to a few Muslims


----------



## Julia (1 October 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, well they display voting intention of the audience on the screen, and it's usually about 44% LNP, 38% Labor, 12% Greens, the rest Other.
> 
> So unless you are going to call the audience liars, how else are you going to ensure an "unstacked" audience.
> 
> As far as the Muslims I saw a few Muslims in the audience, the rest weren't, so I wouldn't say it was highly "stacked" .



Aren't we talking about whether the program is biased or not?
The composition of the audience is just one of the components which will determine this.

You seem to be suggesting bias is determined on the *stated* voting intention of the audience.

We have no idea whether what they state is true, or whether they will allege they are, eg Liberal or Labor in order to be admitted according to what the producers are determining is required in terms of numbers.

Much more important when it comes to bias is the selection of the questions (no doubt just a very few are chosen from hundreds submitted each week), the bias (stated or not) of the panel members, and above all, the capacity of the facilitator to allow participants to run on or be cut off, according to his own bias.

So to suggest bias may be determined by the alleged political preference of the audience is less than realistic imo.

Jones is very smooth.  He can quickly divert an answer that is not to his liking to a panelist whom he knows will fit his agenda.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2014)

My prediction is, we will see Mr Jones running for a Labor seat, at the next election.


----------



## noco (1 October 2014)

Julia said:


> Aren't we talking about whether the program is biased or not?
> The composition of the audience is just one of the components which will determine this.
> 
> You seem to be suggesting bias is determined on the *stated* voting intention of the audience.
> ...




Yes Julia, you hit the nail on the head.....Tony Jones is a master manipulator to suit the agenda of the Green/Labor left wing socialists.

That percentage of political voters he shows each time is a farce.....You only have to observe the applause from the audience when something goes against the Abbott Government or in favor of the Labor Party.

I am sure the majority of voters can see through Jones....only the naive would swallow his modus operandi.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 October 2014)

Julia said:
			
		

> Jones is very smooth. He can quickly divert an answer that is not to his liking to a panelist whom he knows will fit his agenda.




He also has to give everyone a fair chance to answer the question, which means cutting people off if they gabble on for too long, which is something that Christopher Pyne is very good at.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 October 2014)

I've heard a couple of interviews on the ABC this morning (one with Julie Bishop) where the interviewer seemed to be goading the interviewee as to why our forces haven't been involved in the fighting yet. I find that line of questioning amazing. 

Surely if the situation can be resolved by the Arab states without putting our personnel and equipment at risk, that must be a good thing ? You would have to think that particular line of questioning has another agenda.


----------



## noco (8 October 2014)

Is it any wonder the ABC ratings are at an all time low......they have lost all credibility with their reporting.

They know they are biased from all the criticizem they receive and yet they still persist.

Read the comments from this link.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...more_serious_if_abc_shows_topped_the_ratings/


----------



## noco (29 October 2014)

noco said:


> Is it any wonder the ABC ratings are at an all time low......they have lost all credibility with their reporting.
> 
> They know they are biased from all the criticizem they receive and yet they still persist.
> 
> ...




And here is the latest to digest

I have been waiting for the Fabian indoctrinated ABC to make some comment about the Labor Party having requested Treasury to do several models of increasing the GST....Not one word......And yet they criticize the Liberals for even suggesting a discussion on the matter.....It is the same old Labor Party  parrot jabber.....LOOK!!!!!!! the coalition have broken another promise......It is about time the Green/Labor Party stopped  acting like school kids.......but what else would expect from ex union hacks?

But what else  would you expect when it is a known fact that the ABC is the propaganda arm of Green/Labor socialist left. 

I cannot understand why Malcolm Turnbull has not taken some action to remind them of their charter which is taxpayer funded......Maybe Turnbull is condoning it for after all he is more a Socialist than a Liberal. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_trashing_of_the_abc/


----------



## Julia (29 October 2014)

Noco, do you ever actually listen to any of the in-depth current affairs that ABC Radio puts out?  eg Fran Kelly's Breakfast, The World at Noon, PM?

I hear these every day and find that overall the reporting and commentary is fairly even handed.
This morning, for example, Kelly's questioning of Bill Shorten re his refusal to co-operate on the fuel excise was quite aggressive.  She could not reasonably have done more to hold Labor's decision to account.

Where the ABC does show bias in a far more extreme fashion is with some of its presenters, viz particularly John Cleary on Sunday Evenings, and Tony Delroy in The Nightlife.  Try to get a call in to either of these programs and the producer just hangs up on you after saying "Thanks for ringing:  we'll take that as a comment".  Meantime the ultra Left bias is given full reign.

Leigh Sales on 7.30 seems objective and fair enough to me.

Perhaps it's just possible that unless any presenter is as one-eyed and blinkered as Andrew Bolt, you consider them to be biased toward the Left.


----------



## drsmith (29 October 2014)

I don't know why but over the past few weeks, the only News sites I've been able to access is the following,

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/

The Australian returns this,



> This page can't be displayed
> 
> •Make sure the web address http://www.theaustralian.com.au is correct.
> •Look for the page with your search engine.
> ...




Otherwise, I have no connection problems.


----------



## Julia (29 October 2014)

Maybe take it up with them , drsmith.  I'm not having any problems accessing any part of "The Australian" fwiw.

Noco, further to my earlier post, here's a three person discussion about the Peris issue on the ABC's "The Drum".
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-29/nova-peris-rejects-suggestions-of-wrongdoing-to/5852090


----------



## sptrawler (30 October 2014)

drsmith said:


> I don't know why but over the past few weeks, the only News sites I've been able to access is the following,
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/
> 
> ...




I get the same problem if I use internet explorer, it works o.k on google chrome.


----------



## noco (30 October 2014)

Julia said:


> Noco, do you ever actually listen to any of the in-depth current affairs that ABC Radio puts out?  eg Fran Kelly's Breakfast, The World at Noon, PM?
> 
> I hear these every day and find that overall the reporting and commentary is fairly even handed.
> This morning, for example, Kelly's questioning of Bill Shorten re his refusal to co-operate on the fuel excise was quite aggressive.  She could not reasonably have done more to hold Labor's decision to account.
> ...




Yes Julia, I must confess Fran Kelly can be fairly even handed at times but I have not found John Cleary and Tony Delroy to be biased and I listen to both of these gents regularly.

As we all know, Tony Jones and Barrie Cassidy with their  stacked left panel will rip it into the Coalition at every opportunity than can.

Whist Andrew Bolt is anti socialist, I have on occasions heard Bolt criticize the Coalition on the PPL in particular   of which yours truly is opposed to also.

Nevertheless, one cannot detract from the fact that the ABC is the propaganda arm of the Green/Labor Party and they will use it to their full advantage.


----------



## drsmith (13 November 2014)

Leigh Sales on the recent 730 shirtfront skit,



> I can robustly make my case in editorial meetings but ultimately, I have to present what's commissioned.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...front-skit-pathetic-20141113-11llam.html#poll


----------



## noco (16 November 2014)

More lies and bias by the ABC....so are so blatant about it and just seem to ignore the criticism bestowed upon them. 


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ster-tony-abbott/story-e6freon6-1227124251093


----------



## Julia (16 November 2014)

The G20 is a forum for international leaders to discuss finances and economics.

That apparently went right over the heads of Barrie Cassidy and his loyal team today on "Insiders" where the focus was 99% on climate change, despite this having its very own forum in Paris next year (I think).

I didn't hear a single comment about the practice of companies who make their money in one country being required not to evade tax in that country in favour of setting up in such as the Caymans.  Or a single comment about how the high unemployment rate will be addressed by various countries.  Or exactly how the predicted 2.1% growth will be achieved.  Just nothing at all.

What was not actually about climate change was gleeful celebration of how the boot was put in to Putin by most of the leaders, and by Obama to Tony Abbott on climate change.

It's about time Malcolm Turnbull took his p/f seriously and did something about the exponentially growing arrogance of the ABC and its determination to prosecute its own Left agenda.


----------



## drsmith (16 November 2014)

Julia said:


> The G20 is a forum for international leaders to discuss finances and economics.
> 
> That apparently went right over the heads of Barrie Cassidy and his loyal team today on "Insiders" where the focus was 99% on climate change, despite this having its very own forum in Paris next year (I think).
> 
> ...



Bill Shorten's comment about saying nothing to Putin was covered briefly, very briefly.

That's what he's said to both Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard in the past but Ol' Vlad doesn't have to worry about Bill plotting behind his back.


----------



## noco (16 November 2014)

drsmith said:


> Bill Shorten's comment about saying nothing to Putin was covered briefly, very briefly.
> 
> That's what he's said to both Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard in the past but Ol' Vlad doesn't have to worry about Bill plotting behind his back.




Holy hell Doc, surely you would not expect Shorten to criticize one of his comrades.....He would be too afraid Putin might set the a KGB agent on  him. ...After all, they are both Fabians....sorry Julia.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 November 2014)

Julia said:


> The G20 is a forum for international leaders to discuss finances and economics.
> 
> That apparently went right over the heads of Barrie Cassidy and his loyal team today on "Insiders" where the focus was 99% on climate change, despite this having its very own forum in Paris next year (I think).
> 
> ...




I was bitterly disappointed with Insiders yesterday, and have decided to avoid viewing or listening to the the ABC until I see reports in the proper Media outlets of less bias against the Centre and Right of Politics. 

Even The Guardian seems less biased than the ABC.

gg


----------



## Ijustnewit (17 November 2014)

Julia said:


> The G20 is a forum for international leaders to discuss finances and economics.
> 
> That apparently went right over the heads of Barrie Cassidy and his loyal team today on "Insiders" where the focus was 99% on climate change, despite this having its very own forum in Paris next year (I think).
> 
> ...




ABC NEWS24 , had run the same agenda since last Thursday. Every time I switched on to get some news it was the same rant and story , bagging Abbott and Australia over climate change at the G20. The days preceding were the same bagging , only this time about Abbott NOT shirt fronting Putin as promised.
I switched on to ABC NEWS breakfast as I do before work on Friday and had to turn it off after 10 minutes. The hosts  ( Trioli and Roland ) found every excuse to make a snide remark about climate change , Abbott and then linked it to the G 20 . Again as mentioned above , not a single word or article about the G20 economic agenda and targets . To top it off they had Cassidy come in for his regular Friday segment , and no prizes for guessing what he also had to say . 
The ABC news website was the same , running story after story followed by biased opinion articles. Then opening up the article for comments allowing the leftist brigades and Tony haters to take it a couple of steps further. I also noted as usual only anti government comments where allowed to be posted . I note today they are running the great news of the FTA with China . So far no comments pages are opened . I'll bet my last dollar they ( ABC ) are currently re-working the story as we speak , to put a negative leftist spin on it. Only then will they open up the " Have Your Say " so the faithful can do some more dragging down of this Government.


----------



## noco (17 November 2014)

Ijustnewit said:


> ABC NEWS24 , had run the same agenda since last Thursday. Every time I switched on to get some news it was the same rant and story , bagging Abbott and Australia over climate change at the G20. The days preceding were the same bagging , only this time about Abbott NOT shirt fronting Putin as promised.
> I switched on to ABC NEWS breakfast as I do before work on Friday and had to turn it off after 10 minutes. The hosts  ( Trioli and Roland ) found every excuse to make a snide remark about climate change , Abbott and then linked it to the G 20 . Again as mentioned above , not a single word or article about the G20 economic agenda and targets . To top it off they had Cassidy come in for his regular Friday segment , and no prizes for guessing what he also had to say .
> The ABC news website was the same , running story after story followed by biased opinion articles. Then opening up the article for comments allowing the leftist brigades and Tony haters to take it a couple of steps further. I also noted as usual only anti government comments where allowed to be posted . I note today they are running the great news of the FTA with China . So far no comments pages are opened . I'll bet my last dollar they ( ABC ) are currently re-working the story as we speak , to put a negative leftist spin on it. Only then will they open up the " Have Your Say " so the faithful can do some more dragging down of this Government.




I have a feeling Malcolm Turbull is about to set a rocket up the ABC and it can't come sooner enough...The ABC have got away with too much for too long....The ABC have become the Fabian propaganda machine.


----------



## Julia (17 November 2014)

Well, perhaps Mr Turnbull needs a bit of encouragement.  I've just sent him an email along the lines of my earlier post above re "Insiders"
If he were to receive enough such complaints he might start doing his job.


----------



## noco (17 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Well, perhaps Mr Turnbull needs a bit of encouragement.  I've just sent him an email along the lines of my earlier post above re "Insiders"
> If he were to receive enough such complaints he might start doing his job.




I am sure what you have done will not do any harm.

I know my local MP very well and have I have also sent my complaint to him and the latest communication with him indicated the fireworks are about to begin and Turnbull is on his mark.......I hope he is right.....just have to wait and see but I don't know why it has taken Turnbull so long to take some action on the ABC bias.......As we all know the ABC is funded with tax payers money and they do have a charter to follow....that charter clearly states the ABC have to be impartial.


----------



## Macquack (17 November 2014)

noco said:


> The ABC have become the* Fabian *propaganda machine.




Noco, you have been advised by some of your supporters on ASF to drop the "Fabian" generalisations.

 I for one, do not know what "Fabian" means in layman terms ( i.e. stick to "commo bastard" and I might get a true picture of where you are coming from.)

Is the true definition of a "fabian", someone who "will help anyone out with no conditions attached regardless of religion, colour, creed, nationality or political persuasion".

Do you fit that description?


----------



## sptrawler (17 November 2014)

Macquack said:


> Is the true definition of a "fabian", someone who "will help anyone out with no conditions attached regardless of religion, colour, creed, nationality or political persuasion".
> 
> Do you fit that description?




Actually, yes.

I didn't find it a trait, the union organisers I knew, exhibited.


----------



## IFocus (17 November 2014)

Oh god Insiders ridicule Labor and the usual suspects deem it not good enough.

Praise for the Coalition even if it was public servants who did the hard yards

Hockey interview was one of the softest I have seen for hard issues the Coalition face, back track on, lied about etc and you mob still complain................wasting my time here but get real or change your medications.


----------



## sptrawler (17 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> Oh god Insiders ridicule Labor and the usual suspects deem it not good enough.
> 
> Praise for the Coalition even if it was public servants who did the hard yards
> 
> Hockey interview was one of the softest I have seen for hard issues the Coalition face, back track on, lied about etc and you mob still complain................wasting my time here but get real or change your medications.




Never watch the insiders, never watch Bolt, never Q&A, aggressive other half hates politics.lol

I've only got you posters to argue with.lol

Quietly pick up my info on the internet.


----------



## Macquack (17 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> *Hockey* interview was one of the softest I have seen for hard issues the Coalition face, back track on, lied about etc and you mob still complain................wasting my time here but get real or change your medications.




Would that be Joe " I have never paid for a tank of fuel in my entire life" Hockey that you are referring to?

Joe is a man of the people, he has credibility, BIG TIME.


----------



## sptrawler (17 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> Oh god Insiders ridicule Labor and the usual suspects deem it not good enough.
> 
> Praise for the Coalition even if it was public servants who did the hard yards
> 
> Hockey interview was one of the softest I have seen for hard issues the Coalition face, back track on, lied about etc and you mob still complain................wasting my time here but get real or change your medications.




Hope the recent shootings in Mandurah weren't in your area, trust all is well.


----------



## overhang (17 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Never watch the insiders, never watch Bolt, never Q&A, aggressive other half hates politics.lol
> 
> I've only got you posters to argue with.lol
> 
> Quietly pick up my info on the internet.




Very sensible option imo, the 3 shows you mention make me want to pull my hair out.  I accidentally watched both  Q&A last week and a bit of the Bolt report too, it just reminds me why I don't watch much tv apart from sports.  And don't get me started on the Q&A tweets, I swear 90% of them come from the inner city lefties in Adam Bandts seat.
As a whole the media really failed the G20, we had the left taking the climate issue while the right was trying to start the next cold war yet the number 1 issue that needed to be addressed I haven't heard anything about (multinationals dodging taxes).


----------



## noco (17 November 2014)

Macquack said:


> Noco, you have been advised by some of your supporters on ASF to drop the "Fabian" generalisations.
> 
> I for one, do not know what "Fabian" means in layman terms ( i.e. stick to "commo bastard" and I might get a true picture of where you are coming from.)
> 
> ...




Firstly, nobody has and never will advise me....If I want advice from you or anyone else I will ask for it.

If you don't like me using the expression of Fabian, stiff bickies!!!!!!!!!!!!I know you don't like to be labelled with that stigma, but I repeat again, the Greens and half the Labor Party are members of the Fabian society.......Instead of using the shadow of the Greens or the Labor Party, why doesn't these people actually use the name "COMMUNISTS" ?...I WILL GIVE YOU ONE GUESS.

 You say you do not know what a Fabian is.....I have posted it on this forum twice...if you want it again just let me know.


----------



## Julia (17 November 2014)

Macquack said:


> Noco, you have been advised by some of your supporters on ASF to drop the "Fabian" generalisations.



AFAIK I'm the only person who gently suggested to noco that it might be good to drop some of the obsession with the Fabians.  That does not give you the right to classify me as one of noco's supporters.  I have no inbuilt support or dislike for any poster, so kindly refrain from applying classifications that are totally unjustified, Macquack.



overhang said:


> Very sensible option imo, the 3 shows you mention make me want to pull my hair out.  I accidentally watched both  Q&A last week and a bit of the Bolt report too, it just reminds me why I don't watch much tv apart from sports.  And don't get me started on the Q&A tweets, I swear 90% of them come from the inner city lefties in Adam Bandts seat.
> As a whole the media really failed the G20, we had the left taking the climate issue while the right was trying to start the next cold war yet the number 1 issue that needed to be addressed I haven't heard anything about (multinationals dodging taxes).



Agree on both points, overhang.  Just woeful reporting.


----------



## Calliope (17 November 2014)

Macquack said:


> Noco, you have been advised by some of your supporters on ASF to drop the "Fabian" generalisations.




Macquack, I did offer a suggestion to Noco, but he told me I could stick my advice where the sun don't shine. I see he has now given you the same response.


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> Macquack, I did offer a suggestion to Noco, but he told me I could stick my advice where the sun don't shine. I see he has now given you the same response.




And well warranted as far as I am concerned.


----------



## dutchie (18 November 2014)

After being bushwacked on Q and A last night (again) by the Abbott, Abbott, Abbott gang, Malcolm Turnbull must have thought that a 5% reduction in funding was way too low.

The ABC has been getting away with anti Coalition diatribe for way too long.

If it can't uphold its charter to be unbiased then it should be sold off!


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

dutchie said:


> After being bushwacked on Q and A last night (again) by the Abbott, Abbott, Abbott gang, Malcolm Turnbull must have thought that a 5% reduction in funding was way too low.
> 
> The ABC has been getting away with anti Coalition diatribe for way too long.
> 
> If it can't uphold its charter to be unbiased then it should be sold off!




I was so disgusted with that show last night that I switched off less than half through....Turnbull had to go it alone last night with four anti Liberals against him and that Tony Jones allowed that raving lunatic of a comedian to interject and rave on as long as he wanted.......It also appeared to have a very unbalanced and stacked audience who gave the lefties overwhelming support with resounding applause.  

The ABC  was likened  Custer's last stand 26th June 1876.......The ABC threw all they could at Abbott and the Coalition in a last ditch stand to discredit them in every way they could.......I would not be surprised if the ABC realize this may also be their last stand and may well be taken to task with the ABC charter which they have completely ignored.......it is totally dominated by Fabian supporters, engaged by the Labor Party, who have controlled and sprouted their propaganda for far too long.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

noco said:


> I was so disgusted with that show last night that I switched off less than half through....Turnbull had to go it alone last night with four anti Liberals against him and that Tony Jones allowed that raving lunatic of a comedian to interject and rave on as long as he wanted.......It also appeared to have a very unbalanced and stacked audience who gave the lefties overwhelming support with resounding applause.
> 
> The ABC  was likened  Custer's last stand 26th June 1876.......The ABC threw all they could at Abbott and the Coalition in a last ditch stand to discredit them in every way they could.......I would not be surprised if the ABC realize this may also be their last stand and may well be taken to task with the ABC charter which they have completely ignored.......it is totally dominated by Fabian supporters, engaged by the Labor Party, who have controlled and sprouted their propaganda for far too long.




:nosympath


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> :nosympath




Ah yes..the good old Fabians...I love to remind people what they really stand for and I will continue to do so for as long as I live whether you like it or not.

Suck it up sunshine......BTW, I think you violin is out of tune and also your "G' string is broken.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

noco said:


> Ah yes..the good old Fabians...I love to remind people what they really stand for and I will continue to do so for as long as I live whether you like it or not.
> 
> Suck it up sunshine......BTW, I think you violin is out of tune and also your "G' string is broken.




My "F" string is working OK cobber


Have a nice Tea Party


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> My "F" string is working OK cobber
> 
> 
> Have a nice Tea Party




And you have a nice commie day too.


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2014)

noco said:


> I was so disgusted with that show last night that I switched off less than half through.....





Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to give him moral support by watching him whole show? I must say he is looking rather old these days, but his acting has not failed him like his ticker did when charged to be the leader.

He did rather well considering he obviously doesn't believe in much of his party room's policy stupidity. I would hazard a guess he has being spending much time trying to save the ABC from being gutted by his primate brethren. He is afterall one of the few in the LNP with some considered intellect and the ABC is the only station that offers food for the brain amongst the big four.... and it caters for grown ups on the odd occasion too....bonus.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to give him moral support by watching him whole show? I must say he is looking rather old these days, but his acting has not failed him like his ticker did when charged to be the leader.
> 
> He did rather well considering he obviously doesn't believe in much of his party room's policy stupidity. I would hazard a guess he has being spending much time trying to save the ABC from being gutted by his primate brethren. He is afterall one of the few in the LNP with some considered intellect and the ABC is the only station that offers food for the brain amongst the big four.... and it caters for grown ups on the odd occasion too....bonus.




If Turnbull was PM, this country may have emerged from the G20 with some respect, unlike the barely concealed contempt we have received from most of the world leaders.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

> The G20 is a forum for international leaders to discuss finances and economics.
> 
> That apparently went right over the heads of Barrie Cassidy and his loyal team today on "Insiders" where the focus was 99% on climate change, despite this having its very own forum in Paris next year (I think).




Perhaps the increasing attention given to climate change by world leaders is starting to irk the deniers ?


----------



## Julia (18 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> If Turnbull was PM, this country may have emerged from the G20 with some respect, unlike the barely concealed contempt we have received from most of the world leaders.



Oh dear, Turnbull had his go at leadership and failed dismally.   I'm sure you remember the mortification he caused himself and his party over the Godwin Grech fiasco.

Labor disciples like him because his world view is akin to their own.  He would be a natural fit with Labor.  Seems weird that he's a Liberal.     If he was a team player he'd be a bit more insistent on the ABC moderating their Left focus.  He's apparently a pussy apologist for the Left himself.

His popularity is a good example of how an urbane, quite good looking person, with a well modulated voice can win people over.  All superficiality and not much substance perhaps.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Oh dear, Turnbull had his go at leadership and failed dismally.   I'm sure you remember the mortification he caused himself and his party over the Godwin Grech fiasco.
> 
> Labor disciples like him because his world view is akin to their own.  He would be a natural fit with Labor.  Seems weird that he's a Liberal.     If he was a team player he'd be a bit more insistent on the ABC moderating their Left focus.  He's apparently a pussy apologist for the Left himself.
> 
> His popularity is a good example of how an urbane, quite good looking person, with a well modulated voice can win people over.  All superficiality and not much substance perhaps.




Yes, he would be good as a Labor leader, and if he was I doubt if the Liberals could put up any serious opposition against him. He only lost the Liberal leadership by one vote if you recall.

He has the ability to gain respect of both sides of politics, at least the centre of both sides. He's too Liberal for the Far Left and too liberal for the far Right, but everyone else he appeals to. I wouldn't write him off just yet as Liberal leader. 

How many goes at leadership did John Howard have  ? Lazarus may rise again.


----------



## Julia (18 November 2014)

I'd much rather see the calm, competent Julie Bishop leading the Libs. 

 Trouble is, however, that the disastrous Gillard experiment will have probably put the electorate off welcoming another woman for decades to come.


----------



## Macquack (18 November 2014)

Julia said:


> I'd much rather see the calm, competent Julie Bishop leading the Libs.
> 
> Trouble is, however, that the disastrous Gillard experiment will have probably put the electorate off welcoming another woman for decades to come.




I am surprised you say that.

You often say that the electorate should not be underestimated and can think for themselves.

I don't see what the sex of a politician has to do with anything, it should be their performance and nothing else that is judged?

Most of the posters on ASF bagged Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard pretty evenly, I thought.


----------



## boofhead (18 November 2014)

Interesting how readily people write people off after a failed leadership period and forget Howard's history.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Perhaps the increasing attention given to climate change by world leaders is starting to irk the deniers ?




Thats it...deniers don't like the spot light.


----------



## IFocus (18 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> Hope the recent shootings in Mandurah weren't in your area, trust all is well.





All good thanks Sptrawler I am out of the way only Commos and Fabians around me  , some of the ....lets say poorer areas can get a bit tricky at times


----------



## So_Cynical (18 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Oh dear, Turnbull had his go at leadership and failed dismally. *If he was a team player *




I'm constantly amazed by this labelling that someone with a more Liberal opinion than the red necks, deniers and destroyers of the LNP is somehow perceived to not be a team player...he is on the team and playing along with the red necks, probably cringing with the rest of us at the stumbles of one vote Tony and the rest of the looney right.


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

noco said:


> I was so disgusted with that show last night that I switched off less than half through....Turnbull had to go it alone last night with four anti Liberals against him and that Tony Jones allowed that raving lunatic of a comedian to interject and rave on as long as he wanted.......It also appeared to have a very unbalanced and stacked audience who gave the lefties overwhelming support with resounding applause.
> 
> The ABC  was likened  Custer's last stand 26th June 1876.......The ABC threw all they could at Abbott and the Coalition in a last ditch stand to discredit them in every way they could.......I would not be surprised if the ABC realize this may also be their last stand and may well be taken to task with the ABC charter which they have completely ignored.......it is totally dominated by Fabian supporters, engaged by the Labor Party, who have controlled and sprouted their propaganda for far too long.




This link confirms the bias exposed in last nights QandA......What a disgrace the ABC and Tony Jones are.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/unbiased_abc_declares_war_on_conservatives/

* Once again, Q&A claimed 42 per cent of the studio audience were Coalition voters. Yet 100 per cent of the horselaughs, 95 per cent of the applause and 90 per cent of the criticism was directed at the Abbott Government. Abbott’s strongest defender on the show was his great rival, Turnbull.

The ABC is perpetrating a fraud. The shame is that even when Communications Minister Turnbull is in the middle of it he refuses - when specifically asked - to confirm that, yes, the ABC is biased. *


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2014)

noco said:


> This link confirms the bias exposed in last nights QandA......What a disgrace the ABC and Tony Jones are.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/unbiased_abc_declares_war_on_conservatives/
> 
> ...




https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...HO5id6g0oltuBDDb6uJScqT6TqAJBGrMEQdkiMS1TIpYA


----------



## So_Cynical (18 November 2014)

A 50000 dollar per baby cap on paid parental leave so rich women can be paid to have baby's with 5.5 billion in funding while the ABC loses 50 million per year = bizarre.

And people wonder why there is rampant disbelief of the whole "budget crisis" crap.


----------



## drsmith (18 November 2014)

Shock, horror, it's the end of the world.

ABC staff will be forced to walk to a pigeon hole to collect their mail.



> The overhaul of outdated mailroom systems is one of the recommendations of an efficiency review that Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull will use to justify a $50 million-a-year funding cut to the ABC and SBS.
> 
> In contrast to the majority of private sector firms, the ABC maintains a twice-daily mail delivery to the desks of staff in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.




http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...s-250-million-budget-cut-20141118-11p5fb.html


----------



## Julia (18 November 2014)

Julia said:


> I'd much rather see the calm, competent Julie Bishop leading the Libs.
> 
> Trouble is, however, that the disastrous Gillard experiment will have probably put the electorate off welcoming another woman for decades to come.






Macquack said:


> I am surprised you say that.
> 
> You often say that the electorate should not be underestimated and can think for themselves.
> 
> I don't see what the sex of a politician has to do with anything, it should be their performance and nothing else that is judged?



Of course it should.  But that mattered not to the feminazis and other Gillard sympathisers who frantically sought an excuse for her woeful performance.  It was all because of her being a woman, they said, over and over again.   

There is a world of difference between a woman who courts the affections and support of the ardent feminazis and the woman who doesn't have to make a song and dance about being a woman, who regards her gender as irrelevant as she just gets on with the job, assuming no one will rate her other than on how well she does the job, nothing to do with her gender.

If she fails, she won't be blaming misogyny.


----------



## Julia (18 November 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> A 50000 dollar per baby cap on paid parental leave so rich women can be paid to have baby's with 5.5 billion in funding while the ABC loses 50 million per year = bizarre.



Nothing to do with a small 5% cut in ABC funding, but of course the PPL scheme is ridiculous.  I don't know anyone who has said otherwise, barring Mr Abbott himself.

We have, however, heard nothing about this for some time, so hopefully it will be permitted to fade tactfully into oblivion.

FWIW I'm completely against any sort of baby making subsidy, including IVF, being funded by the taxpayer.


----------



## noco (18 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Nothing to do with a small 5% cut in ABC funding, but of course the PPL scheme is ridiculous.  I don't know anyone who has said otherwise, barring Mr Abbott himself.
> 
> We have, however, heard nothing about this for some time, so hopefully it will be permitted to fade tactfully into oblivion.
> 
> FWIW I'm completely against any sort of baby making subsidy, including IVF, being funded by the taxpayer.




So what do you think of the female politicians and public servants receiving full pay for 6 months to have a bay at tax payers expense?.....I am sure that was introduced by a Labor government.


----------



## Julia (18 November 2014)

It should be quite obvious what I think from my previous post, noco.  Completely opposed to it.


----------



## Tisme (19 November 2014)

noco said:


> .I am sure that was introduced by a Labor government.




I think you'll find the PML saw much activity around the early 2000's which was under Howard's watch.


----------



## Calliope (19 November 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> A 50000 dollar per baby cap on paid parental leave so rich women can be paid to have baby's with 5.5 billion in funding while the ABC loses 50 million per year = bizarre.




Yeah, that's pretty expensive for a *baby cap*. A *dutch cap* (diaphragm) is a much cheaper *baby cap*.


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 November 2014)

News Alert :- ABC 24 will now be known as ABC 12 due to funding restrictions.


----------



## Tink (20 November 2014)

noco said:


> This link confirms the bias exposed in last nights QandA......What a disgrace the ABC and Tony Jones are.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/unbiased_abc_declares_war_on_conservatives/
> 
> ...




Agree, the ABC has become a joke and a waste of taxpayers money.

They haven't helped the Victorian election either, with their bias.

Sell it off, slice and dice, we shouldn't have to pay for it.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 November 2014)

Tink said:


> Agree, the ABC has become a joke and a waste of taxpayers money.
> 
> They haven't helped the Victorian election either, with their bias.
> 
> Sell it off, slice and dice, we shouldn't have to pay for it.




Totally disagree.

We need an alternative independent voice to the malicious megalomaniac Murdoch and his cronies in the commercial media.

The ABC provides a balance that most people trust.

I find it interesting how many people in this forum quote ABC news items or articles. 

There is bias is virtually every organisation. If the ABC is biased slightly to the left of the other three commercial tv stations, Murdoch's newspapers, Sky TV and the shock jocks, then that provides an overall balance in the media sector.


----------



## sptrawler (20 November 2014)

Tink said:


> Agree, the ABC has become a joke and a waste of taxpayers money.
> 
> They haven't helped the Victorian election either, with their bias.
> 
> Sell it off, slice and dice, we shouldn't have to pay for it.




It will be interesting to see the outcome of the next Federal election.

Fairfax and the ABC have dedicated a lot of their resources, trying to discredit Abbott and the coalition.
If the coalition win the election comfortably, it will indicate the SMH etc, have allienated a huge sector of their potential customer base.
The shareholders will have every right to be upset.

With regard the ABC, years ago they were the only broadcaster, that people in country areas could recieve.
With the advent of satelite t.v, that is no longer the case.

Therefore it is now more important than ever, that they remain neutral, all taxpayers are paying for the service. 
Unlike Murdoch papers, if they wish to alienate a sector of market, that is their business, as with Fairfax. 

If the ABC don't supply unbiased reporting, it will only be a matter of time before they are privatised or their spectrum sold off.IMO


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2014)

I'm still wanting to see the details of the bias the ABC supposedly has. Anyone here with any proof, apart from quoting Andrew Bolt's obsequious LNP propaganda?

I'm guessing Leigh Sales asking Malcolm last night why Abbott promised no cuts and the reverse is true, is some kind of ABC Fabian, pinko, commo conspiracy .... as if lies are acceptable when mouthed by the LNP?


----------



## Calliope (20 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> I'm still wanting to see the details of the bias the ABC supposedly has.




None so blind as those who will not see. You are obviously blinkered. You should watch The Insiders and Q&A.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> I'm still wanting to see the details of the bias the ABC supposedly has.?




I think it's a case that the ABC dares to cover issues that are not to the liking of the Right, but are real issues nevertheless.

Climate change, renewable energy, social concerns are  not issues that the Right spends much time thinking about, being more concerned with the contents of their wallets,  and when they are laid in front of them, they get frightened because they are things that their inelastic conservative brains cannot understand. The simplest thing to do in that case is to shout* BIAS.*, instead of engaging in debate,

Some people need to understand that covering issues is not the same as expressing an opinion on them.


----------



## sptrawler (20 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> I'm still wanting to see the details of the bias the ABC supposedly has. Anyone here with any proof, apart from quoting Andrew Bolt's obsequious LNP propaganda?
> 
> I'm guessing Leigh Sales asking Malcolm last night why Abbott promised no cuts and the reverse is true, is some kind of ABC Fabian, pinko, commo conspiracy .... as if lies are acceptable when mouthed by the LNP?




If you read my post, I never said they were biased.

Just pointed out that their relevance has deminished, and if they are percieved to be biased, it is only a matter of time before they will go.


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> None so blind as those who will not see. You are obviously blinkered. You should watch The Insiders and Q&A.




True I don't go looking for bias and I'm not fussed at any particular party, but if you say the Insiders is biased I'm wondering why and how? Sometimes facts, like the end score of a footy match,  can be very unsettling when they are not complimentary to your team.

I always considered Tony Jones to be anti Labor, but skewing his interviews to be seen to be neutral. Apparently everyone else knows he is a rabid Labor man because they know how he votes?


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> If you read my post, I never said they were biased.
> 
> Just pointed out that their relevance has deminished, and if they are percieved to be biased, it is only a matter of time before they will go.




I was just picking up on the vibe and generalising. There are certainly those here who have an axe to grind with the ABC.

I remember the ABC way back when much of the broadcast was an looping film of a car driving through the backstreets of some place in Italy or similar. 

I hate that I can't watch anything interesting when Rage is dominating the weekend morning slot. Given the choice of listening to light weights on the "weekend breakfast" editions at 7&9, the Shark navigators, the Nitribullets, the DR Ho's, etc on the subordinate stations, I think there is a clear evidence more money should be ploughed into the ABC to start rebroadcasting the car in the backstreets of Naples.


----------



## noco (20 November 2014)

noco said:


> I have a feeling Malcolm Turbull is about to set a rocket up the ABC and it can't come sooner enough...The ABC have got away with too much for too long....The ABC have become the Fabian propaganda machine.




The rocket has been launched......

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...128901288?sv=dfb48e5c90450fbf1baff3b623dfd261


----------



## So_Cynical (20 November 2014)

noco said:


> The rocket has been launched......
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...128901288?sv=dfb48e5c90450fbf1baff3b623dfd261




YOU'VE REACHED A SUBSCRIBER-ONLY ARTICLE.
Would you like to become a subscriber for 50% less for the first 12 weeks†? Sign up now and access the full breadth of The Australian's content in minutes.

-------

Your paying for this bias crap? reinforcing your own views?


----------



## noco (20 November 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> YOU'VE REACHED A SUBSCRIBER-ONLY ARTICLE.
> Would you like to become a subscriber for 50% less for the first 12 weeks” ? Sign up now and access the full breadth of The Australian's content in minutes.
> 
> -------
> ...




Actually, for your information, I am a subscriber.


----------



## Julia (20 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Totally disagree.
> 
> We need an alternative independent voice to the malicious megalomaniac Murdoch and his cronies in the commercial media.
> 
> ...



Sigh.  Once again, the taxpayer funds the ABC.  Its charter requires it to present a non-partisan view.
Murdoch and Fairfax are not taxpayer funded.  Therefore they can print whatever they like and the market will determine their success or failure.

In all regional Australia, there is little alternative to the ABC, especially if, like me, you prefer radio to TV.
Commercial radio is parochial, full of screaming, amateurish commercials, and just intolerable.  So no choice in reality.



Tisme said:


> I'm still wanting to see the details of the bias the ABC supposedly has. Anyone here with any proof, apart from quoting Andrew Bolt's obsequious LNP propaganda?



Please do not assume that anyone making a criticism of the ABC is necessarily a fan of Mr Bolt.  Mercifully these days, he no longer appears on "Insiders" so to be exposed to his views one must purposely watch his woeful TV program or read his printed word.  Both are entirely avoidable.



> I'm guessing Leigh Sales asking Malcolm last night why Abbott promised no cuts and the reverse is true, is some kind of ABC Fabian, pinko, commo conspiracy .... as if lies are acceptable when mouthed by the LNP?



I have no idea why you would make such a guess.  She asked a perfectly legitimate question and was equally legitimate in her determination to get an answer.  Mr Turnbull was clearly less than comfortable which is his problem, not hers.  There was nothing prejudiced or unfair in her interview imo, and indeed I've rarely concluded that she is anything other than even handed.

I find her very good at her job, much better than Kerry O'Brien.  She is polite but persistent.   Doesn't need to be aggressive or rude to make her point.

Tony Jones, on the other hand, just cuts people off on Q & A when they are trying to make a point which doesn't align with his own philosophy.  Also, the stated proportions of attendees are rubbish.  Often they will say there is 45%/55% conservative audience, but then the guffaws and/or applause for the Left leaning remarks demonstrate this to be patently untrue.  Not that one can blame the producers too much for this:  presumably people are asked to state their political leaning and anyone can lie about it.

Often the panel is stacked with Left leaning participants.

On Radio, the current affairs programs, RN Breakfast, The World Today, and PM, are imo all fairly objective in terms of the actual content of the coverage.  Any bias there is more in excessive covering of something attractive to the Left.  eg all these weeks after Whitlam's death, Radio National is still running docos about Gough's first trip to China etc.   Overkill for anyone who is not passionately devoted to Mr Whitlam.

I might be quite wrong, but I anticipate the results of any cuts to the ABC's budget will only push them even further to the Left as they take advantage of their influential access to the electorate to air their grievances against the government.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 November 2014)

Julia said:
			
		

> Sigh. Once again, the taxpayer funds the ABC. Its charter requires it to present a non-partisan view.
> Murdoch and Fairfax are not taxpayer funded. Therefore they can print whatever they like and the market will determine their success or failure.




Sigh again. I don't believe the ABC as an organisation does show political bias.

A number of reviews by independent people including Kerry Packers old henchman Gerald Stone found little evidence of bias. Just because they sometimes say things you don't like, is no grounds for claiming bias.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...over-bias-claims/story-e6frg996-1226852398864


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Sigh again. I don't believe the ABC as an organisation does show political bias.
> 
> A number of reviews by independent people including Kerry Packers old henchman Gerald Stone found little evidence of bias. Just because they sometimes say things you don't like, is no grounds for claiming bias.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...over-bias-claims/story-e6frg996-1226852398864





yeah but Gerald Stone is therefore a Fabian ..... sheesh can't you use legit articles to support your argument Rumpole; something from Bolt for instance.


----------



## banco (20 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Sigh again. I don't believe the ABC as an organisation does show political bias.
> 
> A number of reviews by independent people including Kerry Packers old henchman Gerald Stone found little evidence of bias. Just because they sometimes say things you don't like, is no grounds for claiming bias.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...over-bias-claims/story-e6frg996-1226852398864




Again it's not the stories themselves that are biased (although some are) so much as the selection of stories. I think it's probably most evident in their coverage of the asylum seeker issue.  If there is a report by some human rights group or other criticizing the Government on their treatment of asylum seekers it will often be the 2nd or 3rd story in the headlines.


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2014)

I'm glad none of us think the ABC is doing a shoddy job, because I was reading this piece the other day and was having trouble correlating what Malcolm said back then (2012) to what he said last night, silly me for doubting Malcolm's weasel words on 7.30 stating he (and the Cormannator) made it very clear pre election that they would put an efficiency clever and budget cuts through the ABC.


http://theconversation.com/turnbull-says-trust-in-abc-crucial-as-newspapers-fall-7805

snippet : _Mr Turnbull said he rejected the proposition that Coalition governments were less favourably disposed towards the ABC. “*The ABC has enjoyed strong support under the Coalition*. The other public broadcaster, SBS, was actually founded by a Coalition government, so I just don’t buy that at all.

“*We don’t have any plans to do anything other than support the ABC*. If there’s an Abbott government, I’ll be the communications minister and I’ll be responsible for the ABC. I think the ABC has to be run efficiently and taxpayers have to get value for money. It’s got to be absolutely scrupulous in its objectivity and balance_



he also said this in 2012: "I am not suggesting politicians are innately less accurate or truthful than anyone else. But rather that the system is not constraining, in fact it is all too often rewarding spin, exaggeration, misstatements,"


----------



## noco (20 November 2014)

noco said:


> The rocket has been launched......
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...128901288?sv=dfb48e5c90450fbf1baff3b623dfd261





Malcolm Turnbull delivers a long-overdue whack to ABC managing director and board

    The Australian
    November 20, 2014 12:00AM

    Print
    Save for later

225
Janet Albrechtsen
Columnist
Sydney

*FINALLY, it has come to this. The Communications Minister has delivered what should be a knock-out punch to the managing director and the board of the ABC.

Everyone expected funding cuts in the order announced by Malcolm Turnbull yesterday, so shaving $254 million from the ABC’s budget over five years is no surprise.

Neither was it a surprise that Turnbull said: “If the management of the ABC think they cannot find a 5 per cent saving through efficiencies, they are selling themselves short and letting down the people of whose resources and trust they are the custodians.”

The bombshell ”” long overdue ”” was Turnbull’s broader whack at Mark Scott’s oversight of the taxpayer-funded media organisation.

Turnbull made clear that Scott’s suggestion at program cuts ”” including Peppa Pig, then Lateline, and worse, the state versions of 7.30 on Friday nights ”” was entirely unnecessary and unreasonable.

Too right. And too polite. It was a lazy management strategy and it was cheap politics.

Turnbull then scored a more direc*t hit at Scott’s leadership: “I propose to recommend to the board that the position of editor-in-chief no longer be combined with that of managing director.”

It’s the equivalent of saying Scott has been missing in action as editor-in-chief, the very role Scott said he would enthusiastically embrace when he applied for the job way back in 2006.

More than eight years on, he has refused to reign in the ABC’s hipster politics, letting the national broadcaster play more to the Twitter community than ordinary Australians.

Turnbull repeated his recent warning to board members: “I have on occasions heard directors say they ‘do not want to get involved’. Well, if they do not want to get involved they should resign.”

Excellent and timely advice. Board members, including ABC chairman Jim Spigelman, have squibbed their statutory obligations for far too long.

The managing director reports directly to the board. If the board won’t hold Scott accountable for meeting reasonable charter oblig*ations that are, after all, the quid pro quo for receiving $1.1 billion from taxpayers, who on earth can?

Turnbull has long been the ABC’s biggest admirer among ministers in the government. Yet Scott and the ABC board have made it harder and harder for even the Communications Minister to go into bat for the ABC.

That Turnbull has turned the bat on the ABC boss and the board is a sign of the exasperation felt by so many Australians, not just Liberals, at the way in which the ABC has neglected its basic core charter obligations while frolicking in other online and digital arenas.

It’s been a long, slow-burning fuse. The final spark came when no one in a position of power at the ABC stopped 7.30 from running an unfunny skit that mocked the deaths of 298 people on board flight MH17.

Not the executive producer of 7.30, not the news and current *affairs honchos and not Scott.

Bias is not the issue here. It’s worse. It signals how far the ABC has moved from reflecting the views of Australians whose taxes fund it.

Turnbull’s remarks are long overdue. But one question remains: why is it too much to expect that the ABC managing director should be willing and able to act as an editor-in-chief?

The problems that grate most with ABC viewers won’t be solved by breaking up the roles of managing director and editor-in-chief. The problems will only be solved when the ABC boss ”” whatever his or her official title ”” takes the ABC charter seriously.

Janet Albrechtsen is a former ABC board member.

Reader comments on this site are moderated before publication to promote lively and civil debate. We encourage your comments but submitting one does not guarantee publication. We publish hundreds of comments daily, and if a comment is rejected it is likely because it does not meet with our comment guidelines, which you can read here. No correspondence will be entered into if a comment is declined.
226 comments
Noel Noel
175 people listening

Newest | Oldest | Top Comments
david
david 16 minutes ago

How can our national public broadcaster be so vulnerable to being the captive of any ginger group? Looks like the governance is not tailored to the enterprise.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Marilyn
Marilyn 25 minutes ago

I'm looking forward to the ABC's 'journalists' (I use that term loosely) strike. Can they start on Saturday?
FlagShare
1Richard ALikeReply
veronica
veronica 20 minutes ago

@Marilyn I hope if they do strike it will be prolonged.

Come on Barry, Tony, Leigh, down tools and keep them down.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Richard A
Richard A 15 minutes ago

@veronica @Marilyn Knowing the ABC they'll still continue to pay their comrades full salary so there won't be any saving.
FlagShare
LikeReply
veronica
veronica 7 minutes ago

@veronica @Marilyn Who in the name of the Lord set those fantastic salaries????

Cannot watch the over fed, over paid Tony Jones.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Christine
Christine 34 minutes ago

*

I understand Janet Albrechtsen is now on the ABC committee for the selection of staff.


----------



## Julia (20 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Sigh again. I don't believe the ABC as an organisation does show political bias.



Of course you don't.  Because it largely reflects your own views, you automatically see it as entirely right and fair.

banco puts it well below:



banco said:


> Again it's not the stories themselves that are biased (although some are) so much as the selection of stories. I think it's probably most evident in their coverage of the asylum seeker issue.  If there is a report by some human rights group or other criticizing the Government on their treatment of asylum seekers it will often be the 2nd or 3rd story in the headlines.



Or the first story, backed up by Gillian Triggs, David Manne et al, in full flight.

Btw I should have added a comment in my earlier post on this topic to the effect that Waleed Aly, presenter of Radio National's Drive program is probably all up best radio presenter.  He's highly intelligent, widely read and educated, a sharp, astute and fearless interviewer in the most laid back way.

I don't know, but presume from his name and his appearance that he's probably Muslim, but I have never once heard any religious or political bias in all of his widely varying subjects.

Such a contrast to some of the white Australians like John Cleary who, in the guise of their Christian religion, make some of the most stridently biased comments.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Of course you don't.  Because it largely reflects your own views, you automatically see it as entirely right and fair.




OK, so ignore the research and opinions of unbiased observers like Gerald Stone who I mentioned.



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> Btw I should have added a comment in my earlier post on this topic to the effect that Waleed Aly, presenter of Radio National's Drive program is probably all up best radio presenter.  He's highly intelligent, widely read and educated, a sharp, astute and fearless interviewer in the most laid back way.
> 
> I don't know, but presume from his name and his appearance that he's probably Muslim, but I have never once heard any religious or political bias in all of his widely varying subjects.
> 
> Such a contrast to some of the white Australians like John Cleary who, in the guise of their Christian religion, make some of the most stridently biased comments.




Agree about Waleed. I believe he is a Muslim, but as you say, we would not know by his opinions. Very balanced and intelligent.


----------



## sptrawler (21 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> OK, so ignore the research and opinions of unbiased observers like Gerald Stone who I mentioned.
> .




You have to realise, the world is changing, the ABC, used to be an essential service, pre new technology.

Now, with satelites and the internet, t.v is readily available anywhere.

So now the ABC is just another media source, but it is funded by the taxpayer, who is represented by the Government.
Because the taxpayer, voted them in.

If the ABC is not giving a balanced report of issues, the Government is going to say, sod it we are going to pull funding.

The ABC has been stupid. 
They can't take sides, because the other side may be in next election.

Also, it would be nice to have a news source that just reported facts.

If you want left leaning reports, buy the SMH, if you want right leaning reports buy the Australian.

If you want an unbiased report of the facts, you should be able to read the ABC, that hasn't been the case.

If they can't do that, they will be sold. Be it by Liberal or Labor


----------



## Tink (21 November 2014)

Agree, well said, sptrawler.

I cannot believe people would say it is unbiased, and it has nothing to do with Bolt. 
It has come to the point where I can't even watch it anymore, especially Q and A, that show is just pathetic. Nothing more frustrating than not allowing people to talk and air their opinions, on the chance that they have a decent guest on there.

I don't usually like to say sell things off, but if they are pushing their own barrow, then let them pay for it in a private company. I know the left think everything is free, but this is getting ridiculous.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> If you want an unbiased report of the facts, you should be able to read the ABC, that hasn't been the case.
> 
> If they can't do that, they will be sold. Be it by Liberal or Labor




It will be punished by a political party which doesn't think that the ABC is "toeing it's own party line".

Tony Abbott basically said the ABC should be an instrument of government propaganda. That's not its job.

Survey after survey say the ABC is the most trusted media organisation in the country, by the PUBLIC , who's opinions matters more than the government of the day imho.


----------



## So_Cynical (21 November 2014)

banco said:


> Again it's not the stories themselves that are biased (although some are) so much as the selection of stories. I think it's probably most evident in their coverage of the asylum seeker issue. * If there is a report by some human rights group or other criticizing the Government on their treatment of asylum seekers it will often be the 2nd or 3rd story in the headlines*.




I imagine that this was because there were NO reports that found turning back the boats etc favourable, therefore nothing pro Noalition to cover.

-------

Fact is that when it comes to detailed TV and radio reporting of politics and political events we have the ABC, Bolt and SBS and then daylight...the commercials only give it 60 or 90 seconds coverage on their news programs.


----------



## Julia (21 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Survey after survey say the ABC is the most trusted media organisation in the country, by the PUBLIC , who's opinions matters more than the government of the day imho.



Of course it's better than at least the other electronic media, which is just abysmal on the whole.
If there were another couple of organisations, funded as well as the ABC is, but prepared to be more rigorous about even handedness, the results of such surveys would be different.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Of course it's better than at least the other electronic media, which is just abysmal on the whole.
> If there were another couple of organisations, funded as well as the ABC is, but prepared to be more rigorous about even handedness, the results of such surveys would be different.




Possibly. But as you say there is a lot of other electronic media out there, so why is it all abysmal ? Why does only the ABC appear to have a commitment to quality that discerning viewers/listeners like you and I find attractive (even if sometimes we don't like the content) ? It's the commercial rationale of appeal to the lowest common denominator that means that basically every commercial media outlet which tries to compete in the market will have to lower its standards. 

Without a public funding, the ABC  will just be another commercial channel, and we have seen what that means.


----------



## Julia (21 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Possibly. But as you say there is a lot of other electronic media out there, so why is it all abysmal ? Why does only the ABC appear to have a commitment to quality that discerning viewers/listeners like you and I find attractive (even if sometimes we don't like the content) ? It's the commercial rationale of appeal to the lowest common denominator that means that basically every commercial media outlet which tries to compete in the market will have to lower its standards.



Yes, that's how it is, but surely it doesn't have to be that way?   It's that very compulsion to appeal to the lowest common denominator that renders much (at least in the regions) media so awful.   Perhaps research has determined that only the less discerning are vulnerable to advertising?



> Without a public funding, the ABC  will just be another commercial channel, and we have seen what that means.



I'm just not sure that's right, Rumpole.  Perhaps a part public funding/part private compromise would see better use of funds  and a partly private Board a more balanced selection of presenters with roughly fifty/fifty Left/Right persuasion, or much better still, more people like Waleed Aly, Paul Barclay and (mostly) Leigh Sales.

It's not a perfect world, however.  And the ABC still does do some really great stuff.  Last weekend there were a couple of radio docos, one about a family facing a member dying from cancer, the other on something similarly affecting, and they were masterpieces of sensitive yet practical presentations.
So utterly at the other end of the scale from anything one would ever hear on, e.g. Hadley or Jones on 2GB.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2014)

Julia said:
			
		

> Perhaps research has determined that only the less discerning are vulnerable to advertising?




A cynical but nevertheless completely accurate observation imo.

Make the programs, fun, lightweight and not requiring much thought and then hit the punters with advertising along the same lines.

 Psychology 101.


----------



## bellenuit (21 November 2014)

One option would be to fund the ABC partly by government and party by donations, like the PBS (Public Broadcasting System) in the US. The PBS network produces some excellent documentaries (remember NOVA) and news programs (PBS Evening News) and radio gems from time to time. A couple of times a year the PBS stations run "telethons" where viewers can donate, just like we do here for charities.

One advantage of being partly funded by donations is that if the station ignores its audience and panders to the opinions of a select few, it will see a drop off in that source of funds. One would need to ensure that donations from vested interest cannot be so large that they could unduly influence the content.


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2014)

A potential problem with private donations to a broad range public broadcaster is that it might be seen to favour the overall socioeconomic that's in a position to donate more.

My quick thought it that it's a model better suited for a broadcaster that specialises in a non-political (and non-religious) area such as science.


----------



## IFocus (21 November 2014)

bellenuit said:


> One option would be to fund the ABC partly by government and party by donations, like the PBS (Public Broadcasting System) in the US. The PBS network produces some excellent documentaries (remember NOVA) and news programs (PBS Evening News) and radio gems from time to time. A couple of times a year the PBS stations run "telethons" where viewers can donate, just like we do here for charities.
> 
> One advantage of being partly funded by donations is that if the station ignores its audience and panders to the opinions of a select few, it will see a drop off in that source of funds. One would need to ensure that donations from vested interest cannot be so large that they could unduly influence the content.




Republicans promised to kill PBS off if they won the Presidency


----------



## Calliope (21 November 2014)

Like most posters on this thread I don't mind alleged biased reporting on the ABC as long as it is directed against someone I hate, despise or distrust. e.g. Sarah Ferguson's and Emma Alberici's "interviews" with Clive Palmer. These women are much more credible than Barrie Cassidy or Sarah's husband Tony Jones with their stacked panels.


----------



## sptrawler (24 November 2014)

Well it would appear the ABC lives up to the publics image of a Government department.

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/th....html&locale=en_GB&sdk=joey&type=button_count

Shorten and the goons, will be front and centre supporting their advertising company.IMO


----------



## Tisme (24 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> Like most posters on this thread I don't mind alleged biased reporting on the ABC as long as it is directed against someone I hate, despise or distrust. e.g. Sarah Ferguson's and Emma Alberici's "interviews" with Clive Palmer. These women are much more credible than Barrie Cassidy or Sarah's husband Tony Jones with their stacked panels.




Anyone that's been in the crosshairs of ABC's Chris Ullman knows that any political bias he might have does not translate to his family and professional outcomes. If anyone makes the mistake of loosening their belt he will take the opportunity to dak 'em and rip a new one without fear nor favour.


----------



## drsmith (24 November 2014)

They've gone straight for services,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/abc-cuts-by-numbers/story-fn3dxiwe-1227132999178


----------



## IFocus (24 November 2014)

Lie on coving a lie

More from the Liberal Daily News


Tony Abbott denies he broke promises over ABC cuts




> TONY Abbott has denied that he promised there would be no cuts to the ABC and SBS.





We all know this is true apparently Shorten only just worked it out



> Mr Shorten said Mr Abbott had misled the public and was engaging in an “extremist, ruthless, right-wing campaign to silence the ABC”.







> Veteran ABC presenter Quentin Dempster described the timing of the cuts as a bit of “bastardry from Tony Abbott”.





http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...es-over-abc-cuts/story-e6frg996-1227133175260


----------



## noco (24 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> Lie on coving a lie
> 
> More from the Liberal Daily News
> 
> ...




So why should the ABC not have expenditure cuts the same as all the others....are they a cut above all the others?....we have to make sacrifices to pay back the Rudd $900 cheques which was really a loan plus all the rest the mess Gillard left.


----------



## Julia (24 November 2014)

noco said:


> So why should the ABC not have expenditure cuts the same as all the others....are they a cut above all the others?....we have to make sacrifices to pay back the Rudd $900 cheques which was really a loan plus all the rest the mess Gillard left.




Noco, that is a completely separate point from the issue of Tony Abbott now saying he didn't say what everyone clearly knows he said.
There is no way in the world this is excusable.

Yes, of course the ABC should experience cuts, despite their hysterical sooking over it today and probably for the next year.  But that does not alter Mr Abbott's perfidy.


----------



## Tink (25 November 2014)

Since Vic Labor says they are going to sack the Ambulance Board, maybe we should sack the ABC Board.

I am all for the comments on public/private.


----------



## noco (25 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Noco, that is a completely separate point from the issue of Tony Abbott now saying he didn't say what everyone clearly knows he said.
> There is no way in the world this is excusable.
> 
> Yes, of course the ABC should experience cuts, despite their hysterical sooking over it today and probably for the next year.  But that does not alter Mr Abbott's perfidy.




So if you say there is no way in the world this is excusable, do you think he should do the right thing and resign his post?.......As I said in the appropriate post, it would get the monkey off the back of the party because Shorten will flog this until the next election......He will do his best to turn voters off Abbott.

What do you think Abbott should do prevent it?


----------



## boofhead (25 November 2014)

noco said:


> What do you think Abbott should do prevent it?




Abbott should stop and think at times about the longer term. He has a habit of saying things that sound good in the short term and trying to please as many people as possible. Some people still remember what he said to farmers in relation to mineral and gas resources on day and in the next couple saying something contradictory to resource companies.

He has not learned from some of the mistakes of Rudd - that is saying stuff to try and please as many people as possible when it doesn't need to be said.

Abbott may have great educational credentials but he doesn't seem to be using it. Instead he seems more interested in his opposition style of looking for the 3 word slogans for news. Also seems more interested in fighting Labor instead of leading a nation. Look back at Howard. He talked more about national need and not about Liberal vs Labor. He used other ministers for that (like Abbott at the time).


----------



## Logique (25 November 2014)

Versatile is the ABC's Commissar Waleed Aly.

One minute he's on _Offsiders_ talking sport with Gerard Whateley and the crew.  Next, he's on _Q & A_ tut-tutting and wagging his finger at Amanda Vanstone. 

Channel Waleed.  But ssshh, don't say 'Muslim' or 'Islam'.

If the ABC budget is so tight, perhaps management could review how much they're paying him, as opposed to the regional services copping it in the neck, like a lizard shedding it's tail.


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2014)

McLovin said:


> The sensationalist garbage that passes for current affairs on ACA and TT get over a million viewers. From the little I've seen of Bolt, his show would target that same demographic.
> 
> Lachie is just trying to turn Ten into a mini Faux News, with guys like Bolt and that idiot on the morning show.




Agree, the target audience are fishwives by nature who crave incendiary arguments ...it's a drug to them. The same thing happens on discussion boards were a certain % almost need to be trolled and abused, while a larger % (it seems) delight in the agony it engenders.

The trouble with the increasing polarisation of political viewpoints and the a fawning over politicians as a result, is that the centre stage appears more left to those of the right and more right to those on the left due to parallax error and blur.

I revisit our time as a nation pre federation, on occasion, to recalibrate my yardstick as to what is right and what is left and I have to say there has been some drift in values that were the foundation of our nation and I wonder if we could do with a dose of their nation building cohesion that appears sadly lacking today.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2014)

Tisme said:
			
		

> I revisit our time as a nation pre federation, on occasion, to recalibrate my yardstick as to what is right and what is left and I have to say there has been some drift in values that were the foundation of our nation and I wonder if we could do with a dose of their nation building cohesion that appears sadly lacking today.




Two, or three if you include the Nationals, entrenched parties more interested in beating each other and waging a class war than nation building.

The whole edifice of politics is crumbling and needs to be torn down and rebuilt. We badly need a new party of evidence based people who decide policy of the basis of facts and not ideology.

Palmer and the Greens are not those people, I wonder who is ?


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> Agree, the target audience are fishwives by nature who crave incendiary arguments ...it's a drug to them. The same thing happens on discussion boards were a certain % almost need to be trolled and abused, while a larger % (it seems) delight in the agony it engenders.
> 
> The trouble with the increasing polarisation of political viewpoints and the a fawning over politicians as a result, is that the centre stage appears more left to those of the right and more right to those on the left due to parallax error and blur.
> 
> I revisit our time as a nation pre federation, on occasion, to recalibrate my yardstick as to what is right and what is left and I have to say there has been some drift in values that were the foundation of our nation and I wonder if we could do with a dose of their nation building cohesion that appears sadly lacking today.




+ 1 as some one from the left of the Communists party (on social issues not the Stalin model ) the Labor Party of today is closer to the Menzies Government than the Coalition is.


The continued criticism of the ABC from people here that its a left wing organisation completely bemuses me.


BTW Christine Milne got an absolute pounding the other day on AM......not a whimper here about it


----------



## noco (25 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> + 1 as some one from the left of the Communists party (on social issues not the Stalin model ) the Labor Party of today is closer to the Menzies Government than the Coalition is.
> 
> 
> The continued criticism of the ABC from people here that its a left wing organisation completely bemuses me.




Are you serious when you say the Labor Party is closer to the Menzies Government than the Liberals?...You are joking of course.

I will hit you over the head with it again, the Greens and half the Labor party are members of the Fabian Society, an affiliate of communism.

Jenny Macklin, Chris Bowen, Stephan Conroy, Tony Burke, Penny Wong just to name a few  and of course don't forget Gillard and the late Gough Whitlam, who was their patron, were and still are members of the Fabian Society.

Why do you think Gillard got rid of Rudd?...It was because Rudd was not a Fabian...Rudd was an obstacle in implementing the Fabian rules. 

Just go to google to view the full list.......You may be in for some surprises.


----------



## Calliope (25 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> BTW Christine Milne got an absolute pounding the other day on AM......not a whimper here about it




Well they have to get it right occasionally, as Emma Alberici did with Palmer.

Even you on rare occasions get it right.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

IFocus said:


> BTW Christine Milne got an absolute pounding the other day on AM......not a whimper here about it




Well do you think maybe, the recent rocket up them, has made them realise they need to get back to basics. Instead of allowing presenters to run personal agendas.

My guess is Channel 10 presenters will get told soon. It is impossible to run an entertainment medium, when you are trying to appeal to a small sector. The presenters are doing themselves and their shareholders a disservice.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2014)

noco said:


> I will hit you over the head with it again, the Greens and half the Labor party are members of the Fabian Society, an affiliate of communism.




And how many LNP members are affiliates of the IPA, spokesmen for big business and the destruction of social services.

Frankly I find the idea of big business running the country for the benefit of themselves and people like Rupert Murdoch a much more frightening prospect than a few latte socialists spouting about social justice.

So enough of this Fabian nonsense, they are much less dangerous than the Far Right, for which our current Prime Minister is an enthusiastic advocate.


----------



## noco (25 November 2014)

For the first time since I have been watching QandA. I must confess the ABC have taken the hint and put on a far more balanced show last night.....The panel was well balanced and the audience also.

I thought Noel Pearson came over very well and did not pull any punches about the ABC.

It looks like the ABC have finally got the message.....lets hope they continue although last night was the last for the year.


----------



## Julia (25 November 2014)

noco said:


> So if you say there is no way in the world this is excusable, do you think he should do the right thing and resign his post?.......As I said in the appropriate post, it would get the monkey off the back of the party because Shorten will flog this until the next election......He will do his best to turn voters off Abbott.
> 
> What do you think Abbott should do prevent it?



boofhead has very adequately responded to your question.  After more than a year in the job Mr Abbott should have developed an ease of communication and increased confidence from the electorate.  Instead he is going in the other direction.  As "The Australian" pointed out in the wake of the G20, with the FTAs signed and all the pomp of so many world leaders here, someone like Paul Keating would have been trumpeting his success loudly and convincingly.   Instead, much of the focus fell on the ill mannered Obama's speech to a bunch of children, and how many people were unkind to Putin!!

If Mr Abbott can't do better than this, then yes, he should move aside for someone more able to communicate properly.



Logique said:


> Versatile is the ABC's Commissar Waleed Aly.
> 
> One minute he's on _Offsiders_ talking sport with Gerard Whateley and the crew.  Next, he's on _Q & A_ tut-tutting and wagging his finger at Amanda Vanstone.
> 
> ...



Well, I'd largely support Waleed Aly.  I hear him often on his radio program and find him an intelligent, thoughtful commentator and interviewer.  Also has a good, if subtle, sense of humour.


----------



## Boggo (25 November 2014)

There has to be a problem that has to be sorted out when the head of the ABC gets paid ($800,0000 pa) more than double that of either Tony Abbott, Tony Blair or Barack Obama.

Not bad for a taxpayer funded institution !!!


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2014)

Apparently no one loses a job with the ABC:

http://scott-ludlam.greensmps.org.a...hout-notice-cuts-abc-and-job-losses-400-staff


----------



## Julia (25 November 2014)

Boggo said:


> There has to be a problem that has to be sorted out when the head of the ABC gets paid ($800,0000 pa) more than double that of either Tony Abbott, Tony Blair or Barack Obama.
> 
> Not bad for a taxpayer funded institution !!!




+1.


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2014)

Boggo said:


> There has to be a problem that has to be sorted out when the head of the ABC gets paid ($800,0000 pa) more than double that of either Tony Abbott, Tony Blair or Barack Obama.
> 
> Not bad for a taxpayer funded institution !!!




$800,000 for managing a $1bn turnover is fairly reasonable isn't it? Our man in charge of Qantas gets more for collapsing a national icon into a basket case.

It's not like Abbott is managing very well either, but the truth is he probably receives far more than $800k as a package... just his charity work alone must bring in a modest income for the groceries and bills.


----------



## Boggo (25 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> $800,000 for managing a $1bn turnover is fairly reasonable isn't it? Our man in charge of Qantas gets more for collapsing a national icon into a basket case.
> 
> It's not like Abbott is managing very well either, but the truth is he probably receives far more than $800k as a package... just his charity work alone must bring in a modest income for the groceries and bills.




If the ABC ran efficiently the turnover would be half that. 

They dude in Qantas is just doing the dirty work that was set out ages before he came on board, the demise of the white rat, a plan that Jackson an Co were worried that Borghetti wouldn't follow to the letter.

There is more to these stories than what the average protester knows (or wants to know).

At least the ABC is fair, they used to knock the opposition but since Sept 2013 they now knock the party in power


----------



## overhang (25 November 2014)

Boggo said:


> There has to be a problem that has to be sorted out when the head of the ABC gets paid ($800,0000 pa) more than double that of either Tony Abbott, Tony Blair or Barack Obama.
> 
> Not bad for a taxpayer funded institution !!!




It's all about relativity, what are rival CEO's being paid in the media industry.
According to this article he earns the least at $695,000 







> ABC managing director Mark Scott may oversee more journalists than anyone else in the country, but he’s far from our best-paid media boss. Scott’s pay packet is dwarfed by that of his best-paid counterparts in the private sector, a Crikey survey has found. And he’s positively a pauper compared to Melbourne Herald cadet turned News Corp CEO Robert Thomson.



http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/09/25/whos-making-money-on-australian-media-the-ceo-salary-survey/

It may be a tax payer funded organisation but you can't expect to recruit quality without significant remuneration that is similar to rivals.  So you must be opposed to Ahmed Fahour earning 4.8 million as CEO of Australia Post or the Medibank Private CEO who earned 1.2 million prior to privatisation.  The Federal Police commissioner earns $650k.


----------



## Boggo (25 November 2014)

overhang said:


> ...
> 
> It may be a tax payer funded organisation but you can't expect to recruit quality without significant remuneration that is similar to rivals.




They obviously haven't recruited quality in this case, the guy is useless. If he was doing his job he would have cleaned the place up and made it efficient rather than being forced to, how long do you think he would last in the private sector.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 November 2014)

Scott is about to gut ABC Regional and Landline in a puerile attempt to get back at Government for a reasonable request to be more efficient.

Ultimo needs to be cut more.

gg


----------



## banco (25 November 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Scott is about to gut ABC Regional and Landline in a puerile attempt to get back at Government for a reasonable request to be more efficient.
> 
> Ultimo needs to be cut more.
> 
> gg




We'll miss all the stories about sheep shearing contests.  


Time the Nationals ate their own cooking.


----------



## overhang (25 November 2014)

Boggo said:


> They obviously haven't recruited quality in this case, the guy is useless. If he was doing his job he would have cleaned the place up and made it efficient rather than being forced to, how long do you think he would last in the private sector.




I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, as far as efficiency is concerned the review found 60 million in savings that could be had but it would *cost 75 million to implement*.  Hardly a reason to justify 254 million in cuts.  That really makes your original statement about the salary bizarre too, you think he is doing a poor job so cutting the wage of this job title is bound to attract a suitable replacement.... 

During this time the ABC have made a very impressive expansion into the digital market.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Scott is about to gut ABC Regional and Landline in a puerile attempt to get back at Government for a reasonable request to be more efficient.
> 
> Ultimo needs to be cut more.
> 
> gg




At the end of the day he will have to justify his reasoning, if he can't, no doubt he will be sacked.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

overhang said:


> I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, as far as efficiency is concerned the review found 60 million in savings that could be had but it would *cost 75 million to implement*.  Hardly a reason to justify 254 million in cuts.  That really makes your original statement about the salary bizarre too, you think he is doing a poor job so cutting the wage of this job title is bound to attract a suitable replacement....
> 
> During this time the ABC have made a very impressive expansion into the digital market.




At the same time alienating a major sector of the population, I guess it depends, what is important.

If he was running your business, and the way he ran it, discouraged women from coming into your shop. Would you be happy because he built you a great website?


----------



## banco (25 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> At the same time alienating a major sector of the population, I guess it depends, what is important.




I don't think Rupert Murdoch constitutes a major sector of the population?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2014)

banco said:


> I don't think Rupert Murdoch constitutes a major sector of the population?




Murdoch has often said that the ABC is eating his lunch, now a bit of it has been regurgitated.


As far as funding the ABC, I wouldn't mind paying say $100 per year to keep it going, provided that I and all the other subscribers could nominate and vote for the board.

Janet Albrechsen would be the first to go, Quentin Dempster would be in.


----------



## overhang (25 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> At the same time alienating a major sector of the population, I guess it depends, what is important.
> 
> If he was running your business, and the way he ran it, discouraged women from coming into your shop. Would you be happy because he built you a great website?




I don't accept your analogy, it implies I agree with the premise that the ABC alienates a sector of the community which I don't.  If one only reads Murdoch press then they will have difficulty finding the ABC balanced but that says more about the Murdoch press than it does about the ABC.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

overhang said:


> I don't accept your analogy, it implies I agree with the premise that the ABC alienates a sector of the community which I don't.  If one only reads Murdoch press then they will have difficulty finding the ABC balanced but that says more about the Murdoch press than it does about the ABC.




I don't subscibe to any papers and can't even get minimal access, to the 'Australian'.

I derive most of my info and opinion from the internet and T.V.

From the T.V perspective, I personally think you would have to be a moron to watch, Bolt or Q&A.

Far too many presenters and reporters, feel they have the right to push their personal political beliefs, far too many have a belief I'm interested in their belief's.

I don't think I'm alone in this belief.lol


----------



## overhang (25 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I don't subscibe to any papers and can't even get minimal access, to the 'Australian'.
> 
> I derive most of my info and opinion from the internet and T.V.
> 
> ...




Sorry I wasn't referring to you with that statement.
I do think the ABC needs an indirect funding increase, I think an independent board needs to be appointed to oversee the ABC, SBS and Triple J.  This board would have the job of ensuring the ABC abide by their charter and handle all complaints too.  The board would have the ability to sanction staff that fail to abide by the charter, I'm aware there are many grey areas here but at least an independent board would prevent the accusations of the ABC looking after their own.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

overhang said:


> Sorry I wasn't referring to you with that statement.
> I do think the ABC needs an indirect funding increase, I think an independent board needs to be appointed to oversee the ABC, SBS and Triple J.  This board would have the job of ensuring the ABC abide by their charter and handle all complaints too.  The board would have the ability to sanction staff that fail to abide by the charter, I'm aware there are many grey areas here but at least an independent board would prevent the accusations of the ABC looking after their own.




The ABC has a responsibilty to be impartial, if a presenter can't do it they should move to a channell that better fits their leaning.
However, if I as a taxpayer watch the ABC, I expect to hear a concise, factual report or programme.

I'm paying for that.

I also think most of the media, is playing the' Abbott game', thinking they will increase their audience.
All they are doing is making a dysfunctional parliament and an ever more worried population. 
They are absolute fools, they will bring on a recession, then their audience will be decimated.


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> I don't subscibe to any papers and can't even get minimal access, to the 'Australian'.



It's still possible to bypass the paywall. It's more tedious but doable. There's also Andrew Bolt's blog for the guts of some articles.

The Fairfax press is easier.


----------



## Julia (25 November 2014)

Boggo said:


> They obviously haven't recruited quality in this case, the guy is useless. If he was doing his job he would have cleaned the place up and made it efficient rather than being forced to, how long do you think he would last in the private sector.



He would never be employed in the private sector in the first place.



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Scott is about to gut ABC Regional and Landline in a puerile attempt to get back at Government for a reasonable request to be more efficient.
> 
> Ultimo needs to be cut more.
> 
> gg



Yes, one of the greatest complaints about the ABC is how Sydney-centric they have become.  Scott's tactics are clearly revenge in the hope of causing maximum fall out against the government.  Unbelievably petty.

Actually, although I'm against the principle of removing funding from the regions, the actual result on radio at least will probably be an improvement.  The local regional radio programs are like something out of the 1960s, completely pathetic.


sptrawler said:


> At the end of the day he will have to justify his reasoning, if he can't, no doubt he will be sacked.



Sacked?  By whom?



overhang said:


> I don't accept your analogy, it implies I agree with the premise that the ABC alienates a sector of the community which I don't.  If one only reads Murdoch press then they will have difficulty finding the ABC balanced but that says more about the Murdoch press than it does about the ABC.



I'm so surprised to hear you say this, overhang.  You really don't think there's an unreasonable bias when, e.g., Insiders has just one centre right member amongst a total of four people?  Cassidy is ex Labor staffer, and always two others are from the Left, then there's just the lonely Gerard Henderson or Nikki Saava who has to try to get their opinion in against all three.

Then Q & A's Tony Jones blatantly shuts down any views that he doesn't agree with, and the audience guffaws and applauds comments from the Left whilst making their displeasure known at anything with a remotely contrary view.

I could go on with many more examples from radio, viz trying to phone in to radio talkback program to express an opinion contrary to the overwhelming anti-government rhetoric, and being simply told by the producer "we'll take that as a comment, thanks for calling" before hanging up.

Then, looking across all the presenters on Radio National and Local Radio, there is not a single one who has a conservative background.  Nearest is Amanda Vanstone, a small l Liberal, with a half hour interview program in an obscure early afternoon time.  There must be more than 100 presenters all up, and they almost all come from the Left.  No bias???

No bias????   Must be looking through a very specific filter.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

drsmith said:


> It's still possible to bypass the paywall. It's more tedious but doable. There's also Andrew Bolt's blog for the guts of some articles.
> 
> The Fairfax press is easier.




There really isn't much worth reading doc, there are very few articles that give a true appraisal and account of the facts.IMO

A few days later when all the 'dust' settles, the facts come out and are easily read on free sites. 
The initial hot off the press articles in most instances, are supposition and speculation, with the reporters bent on it. Well that's my belief.


----------



## overhang (25 November 2014)

Julia said:


> He would never be employed in the private sector in the first place.
> 
> 
> Yes, one of the greatest complaints about the ABC is how Sydney-centric they have become.  Scott's tactics are clearly revenge in the hope of causing maximum fall out against the government.  Unbelievably petty.
> ...




Fair points, I guess I more meant that I don't think it's extreme as Sptrawlers analogy implied.  I seem to have forgotten that when writing that I can't watch Q&A and Insiders without finding myself quite frustrated.  I find the ABC news pretty balanced all though I'm sick of the political correctness being shoved down our throats eg 







> A new study has found that women make up just a quarter of those employed in the key management positions of Australian companies



 which was one of todays top stories.

The thing is bias can be quite a subjective topic, for example I would imagine if the ABC were able to start moving to the right so to speak then I feel you would find it quite balanced before say noco does.


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

sptrawler said:


> However, if I as a taxpayer watch the ABC, I expect to hear a concise, factual report or programme.
> 
> I'm paying for that.
> 
> .




Obviously I'm not the only one that believe's, the ABC should write/report facts, they don't get paid to sensationalise.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/abc-news-phil-hughes-tweet-causes-uproar-20141125-11tnwu.html

Leave the BS to the commercial press, let them pick winners, they live and die by their choices.

The ABC doesn't have to attract advertising dollars, so why not just give accurate imformative coverage?:1zhelp:


----------



## sptrawler (25 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Sacked?  By whom?
> 
> .




My appologies, I didn't realise it was a honorary position that you can't be removed from.


----------



## Julia (25 November 2014)

Overhang, I agree that on the whole the* content* of the news is fairly presented.

The bias can occur more in what items are included in the news bulletin and which are omitted, also the priority they are given.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2014)

overhang said:
			
		

> A new study has found that women make up just a quarter of those employed in the key management positions of Australian companies




Do you have evidence to the contrary ?

If not you must have some objection to this subject being reported at all.

Why is that ?


----------



## Tink (26 November 2014)

The arrogance of Mark Scott is unbelievable, that he would cut the shows that were most wanted, and leave the shows that they were sued by. 
Speaks volumes.

I agree with GG, if he can't be sacked, cut more.

They have a charter to follow, and if they can't do that, then they shouldn't be there.


----------



## overhang (26 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Do you have evidence to the contrary ?
> 
> If not you must have some objection to this subject being reported at all.
> 
> Why is that ?




Well firstly I don't believe this story is a top story that should be in the first 3 stories to be aired, we have more pressing news than this.

But the study doesn't list the most relevant data we need to determine if there is a huge issue here, we need to know the average wage difference to women without children who have been in the workforce for 15+ years.  The reality is why should women who start family's expect to earn the same and have the same chance at a management role when they're going to have at least 1 year (assuming 1 child) out of the workforce.  Combine this with the flexible hours that parents request and why would you as an employer give the management role to this individual over a worker who hasn't required this time off and also works the overtime to cover the parent working flexi hours?  I also would expect a stay at home dad will also run into the same issues here.  There is obviously no problem with women starting family's but don't expect the same chance or pay as the workers who have dedicated there life to the business. 

 Lets say you have 2 equal candidates for a management role, one is a 30 year old male and the other a 30 year old childless female.  You have the largely added risk by giving the job to the female that at this time in her life she will decide to start a family and you will lose her for 6 months+, this isn't good for a stable business and the more conservative choice would be the male.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2014)

overhang said:
			
		

> ... this isn't good for a stable business and the more conservative choice would be the male.




OK, so your essential point is that the story is biased because it failed to present the "conservative" view of the study ?

Maybe you are right, but I doubt if you would find many executives willing to present your view in public, even if they agree with it, it a bit of a hot potato politically.


----------



## overhang (26 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> OK, so your essential point is that the story is biased because it failed to present the "conservative" view of the study ?
> 
> Maybe you are right, but I doubt if you would find many executives willing to present your view in public, even if they agree with it, it a bit of a hot potato politically.




When did I ever mention bias?  What I said was they're ramming this sort of political correctness down our throats.  As I pointed out there is a very good reason this study found the results they found and there really isn't a problem here.  Now female genital mutilation is a much more pressing issue that deserves our attention instead of this rubbish.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2014)

overhang said:


> When did I ever mention bias?  What I said was they're ramming this sort of political correctness down our throats.




So what would you prefer they ram down our throats ?



> As I pointed out there is a very good reason this study found the results they found and there really isn't a problem here.  Now female genital mutilation is a much more pressing issue that deserves our attention instead of this rubbish.




It's your opinion that there is no problem. According to you, males are preferred in business, not necessarily on the basis of ability, but because they are not going to take maternity leave. If you were a woman I would say that you would not have that opinion. Seems to be 1950's thinking to me.


----------



## Tisme (26 November 2014)

overhang said:


> What I said was they're ramming this sort of political correctness down our throats.  .




I'm guessing your upset is not so much the content, but the impudence you are being compelled to accept the prescribed verdict? I think we all feel that on occasion; the worst of it was the political correctness disease that washed over us in the late '80s and well into the 90's with anyone able to make up a compelling correction req'd.

The thing about the ABC is that it is a govt entity and therefore it has the public service stain of compliance to procedures and rules demanded by the PS for spending taxpayer monies. Listening and witnessing the ABC is like engaging with a public service lifer, the same aversion to visceral friendship, the same uncomfortable conversation, the stubborn refusal to engage with gay abandon, the overt display of stoicism. 

I can understand why the Liberals within the LNP don't like the ABC, because it must annoy them having to explain themselves in public service speak they know the majority of their supporters wouldn't understand or care about.

My pet hate with the ABC is two fold: 

1) The so called "Breakfast Show" with Michael Rowland,Virginia Trioli and Paul Kennedy. I wonder who the men's hairdresser is and where the guys bought the same cheap suits (they look like they came from the same egg) and, while I'm sure she's a hoot to be with, I think Virginia is tiresome trying to have an answer for everything;

2) the second hate is that the options of watching anything when the "Breakfast Show" is on are limited to IQ100 land on the other stations dammit.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2014)

Tisme said:
			
		

> 1) The so called "Breakfast Show" with Michael Rowland,Virginia Trioli and Paul Kennedy. I wonder who the men's hairdresser is and where the guys bought the same cheap suits (they look like they came from the same egg) and, while I'm sure she's a hoot to be with, I think Virginia is tiresome trying to have an answer for everything;




Other "hates" about this show

 - too dumbed down, endless repeats of sport and weather, too much "entertainment" news and interviews, repeats of items at least 5 times during the show, silly and trivial "topics of the day", too much small talk between presenters, not enough current affairs, science or business interviews.

 They used to have business interviews every morning, but they are rarely seen now.

The other stations are even worse. I'll think I'll find a good radio station.


----------



## overhang (26 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> So what would you prefer they ram down our throats ?
> 
> 
> 
> It's your opinion that there is no problem. According to you, males are preferred in business, not necessarily on the basis of ability, but because they are not going to take maternity leave. If you were a woman I would say that you would not have that opinion. Seems to be 1950's thinking to me.




I'd rather nothing was rammed down our throats, I'd rather top stories were actual news items relevant to current affairs.

Please don't make assumptions, in my example I indicated it was 2 candidates with equal credentials one male and one female and I explained my justification for employing the male from a business prospective.  I think employers are normally capitalists first and sexists second (if that were the case) and would employ a female for a management role if she was far above the rest, but how often do you have candidates that stand out far above the rest.
I would say someone like Julia Gillard would find the reality of my remarks quite confronting but I think a realist like Julia Bishop would understand that employers must do what's best for the stability of their business.


----------



## Julia (26 November 2014)

Overhang, your point from the position of an employer was pragmatic and realistic.  The first responsibility of business is to do what is best for their shareholders, not to promote any notion of positive discrimination in favour of women or any other group.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Overhang, your point from the position of an employer was pragmatic and realistic.  The first responsibility of business is to do what is best for their shareholders, not to promote any notion of positive discrimination in favour of women or any other group.




Of course, that decision results from a conclusion that a woman is necessarily going to go on and have babies and therefore be absent from the business. It is in fact an assumption about someone's private life which others probably have no right to make.

Given that many women place career ahead of children these days, the decision to prefer men over women is not necessarily valid anymore.


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> It is in fact an assumption about someone's private life which others probably have no right to make.




People may make any assumptions they like.  After all you make assumptions (usually false) about other people's posts on a daily (almost hourly) basis..


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> People may make any assumptions they like.  After all you make assumptions (usually false) about other people's posts on a daily (almost hourly) basis..




Are you trolling again ?

You know what happens when you do that


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2014)

If this is your way of trying to stop me responding, you may correctly assume that you have me by the short and curlies.


----------



## Julia (27 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Of course, that decision results from a conclusion that a woman is necessarily going to go on and have babies and therefore be absent from the business. It is in fact an assumption about someone's private life which others probably have no right to make.



You seem to be arguing for the sake of it.
Assumptions are just that.  In this instance it is an entirely reasonable assumption, all other factors being equal.
viz  there is no chance that a bloke is going to go and have babies:  there is a chance that the woman is.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Julia said:


> You seem to be arguing for the sake of it.




It's a lot easier to argue when people advocate equality with one breath and discrimination with the next.


----------



## Tisme (27 November 2014)

Julia said:


> You seem to be arguing for the sake of it.
> Assumptions are just that.  In this instance it is an entirely reasonable assumption, all other factors being equal.
> viz  there is no chance that a bloke is going to go and have babies:  there is a chance that the woman is.




I'm starting to wonder at that preposition too. Aren't we buying our babies from Thailand and India now?


----------



## Julia (27 November 2014)

Try to understand, Rumpole, that arguing for something (equality) is quite different from describing the reality of what exists.   I have nowhere argued for positive or negative discrimination in the workforce, always merit.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Julia said:


> Try to understand, Rumpole, that arguing for something (equality) is quite different from describing the reality of what exists.   I have nowhere argued for positive or negative discrimination in the workforce, always merit.




Yes, fair enough. There are a lot of things that exist that can and should be changed. It depends on how people want to change one reality into another, if that is considered desirable for society.


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Are you trolling again ?
> 
> You know what happens when you do that




On second thoughts why should I allow you to shut me up.  I know I am a soft target, but I have served my time in the sin-bin. You are not the first poster on the left to make these implied threats that if I upset you I will be banned again for trolling. If you think you can make it stick, go ahead.

If not...a retraction would be in order.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> On second thoughts why should I allow you to shut me up.  I know I am a soft target, but I have served my time in the sin-bin. You are not the first poster on the left to make these implied threats that if I upset you I will be banned again for trolling. If you think you can make it stick, go ahead.
> 
> If not...a retraction would be in order.




Ahh, chill out. I'm not the judge, jury and executioner in here, that's Joe's job.

You cast aspersions on me without provocation. I'm not going to run to the Moderator, I'm sure he knows where to draw the line.


----------



## Joe Blow (27 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> After all you make assumptions (usually false) about other people's posts on a daily (almost hourly) basis..




Trolling by deliberately trying to provoke another ASF member. 



SirRumpole said:


> Are you trolling again ?




Yes, Calliope is trolling again.



Calliope said:


> On second thoughts why should I allow you to shut me up.  I know I am a soft target, but I have served my time in the sin-bin. You are not the first poster on the left to make these implied threats that if I upset you I will be banned again for trolling. If you think you can make it stick, go ahead.




Yes, you were trolling again. You set out to deliberately provoke SirRumpole with a completely unnecessary swipe. When you didn't get the reaction you wanted, in true forum troll form you went back on the attack.



Calliope said:


> If not...a retraction would be in order.




No retraction required. You were trolling and were called on it. Now cease and desist.


----------



## Tisme (27 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Other "hates" about this show
> 
> - too dumbed down, endless repeats of sport and weather, too much "entertainment" news and interviews, repeats of items at least 5 times during the show, silly and trivial "topics of the day", too much small talk between presenters, not enough current affairs, science or business interviews.
> 
> ...




Yeah the jungle drums rolling in like thunder to entre a featherweight story gives me the irrates. It reminds me of the Naked Vicar Show sketch where the drumming crescendos and the voiceover manages  " IN SEARCH THE NILE" followed by a splash and shrill voice..."found it!"


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> Yeah the jungle drums rolling in like thunder to entre a featherweight story gives me the irrates. It reminds me of the Naked Vicar Show sketch where the drumming crescendos and the voiceover manages  " IN SEARCH THE NILE" followed by a splash and shrill voice..."found it!"




I found my local ABC news radio station. Much better coverage of the news and no chit chat.


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2014)

Joe Blow said:


> Trolling by deliberately trying to provoke another ASF member.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Well I guess that effectively rules me out from responding to anyone's post again. There is always the possibility that if they don't agree with me they only have to call me a troll and dirt sticks.

From now on I will  refrain from negative comment on other posts. I have no further objection to anyone slanging me however.


----------



## Tisme (27 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Ahh, chill out. I'm not the judge, jury and executioner in here, that's Joe's job.
> 
> You cast aspersions on me without provocation. I'm not going to run to the Moderator, I'm sure he knows where to draw the line.




The amount of time some members throw mud at you (and mean it) is astounding. I know you had your detractors on the QANDA forum, but the repetitious "fabian" bulldogging, for example is fatuous.

For the readers: Rumpole is rather well respected on boards as being boringly middle of the road, conciliatory and a gentleman. He, me and many others have quite conflicting viewpoints and I for one am happy to overlook the stupidity of the others in the name of internet friendship and ask the same from you rabble.


----------



## Joe Blow (27 November 2014)

Calliope said:


> Well I guess that effectively rules me out from responding to anyone's post again. There is always the possibility that if they don't agree with me they only have to call me a troll and dirt sticks.
> 
> From now on I will  refrain from negative comment on other posts. I have no further objection to anyone slanging me however.




Here's an idea. See if you can respond to someone's post without insulting them, provoking them, putting words in their mouth, making accusations or otherwise being anti-social and obnoxious. You know, engage in a discussion for the purpose of a constructive exchange of ideas rather than using ASF as an outlet for your anger and aggression.

Anyway, I'm not opening this up for debate, so this little diversion ends here. Back on topic please.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2014)

Tisme said:


> The amount of time some members throw mud at you (and mean it) is astounding. I know you had your detractors on the QANDA forum, but the repetitious "fabian" bulldogging, for example is fatuous.
> 
> For the readers: Rumpole is rather well respected on boards as being boringly middle of the road, conciliatory and a gentleman. He, me and many others have quite conflicting viewpoints and I for one am happy to overlook the stupidity of the others in the name of internet friendship and ask the same from you rabble.




Boring ? How dare you sir, sabres at 20 paces !

As for the rest, thanks.


----------



## Logique (29 November 2014)

You'll have to separate them Joe 

I just want to acknowledge NSW ABC journo Quentin Dempster, whose position is to be a victim of ABC MD Mark Scott's ideology wars.  Along with sundry small regional offices. In other words the very opposite of what was required, and taking out the wrong people.

Dempster was well liked and respected, a quality journalist, one of, if not the best at the ABC, and he didn't deserve this. He will be missed.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 November 2014)

Logique said:


> You'll have to separate them Joe
> 
> I just want to acknowledge NSW ABC journo Quentin Dempster, whose position is to be a victim of ABC MD Mark Scott's ideology wars.  Along with sundry small regional offices. In other words the very opposite of what was required, and taking out the wrong people.
> 
> Dempster was well liked and respected, a quality journalist, one of, if not the best at the ABC, and he didn't deserve this. He will be missed.




Getting rid of experienced journos at the ABC is pathetic. From what I've seen of ABC24 there are enough boofhead and airhead cub reporters on that channel who wouldn't be missed in order to save Dempsters job.

Dempster is as tough as they come. He hands it out in spades to both Coalition and Labor when they deserve it. Just the sort of person that is needed in media.

Mark Scott seems to have some strange priorities when it comes to staff cuts.


----------



## noco (29 November 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Getting rid of experienced journos at the ABC is pathetic. From what I've seen of ABC24 there are enough boofhead and airhead cub reporters on that channel who wouldn't be missed in order to save Dempsters job.
> 
> Dempster is as tough as they come. He hands it out in spades to both Coalition and Labor when they deserve it. Just the sort of person that is needed in media.
> 
> Mark Scott seems to have some strange priorities when it comes to staff cuts.




Dempster was obviously a different colour to the likes of Tony Jones and Barry Cassidy.


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2014)

> Coalition MP and former long-serving ABC journalist Sarah Henderson says the national broadcaster is too Sydney-centric and often inefficient, saying its focus on big markets is leaving regions under-resourced.
> Ms Henderson said there are "many examples of inefficiencies and waste" at the ABC. But she says that's not the case in her electorate, which includes Victoria's second biggest city, Geelong.
> "The ABC, for many years, has been far too Sydney-centric, and my view is the ABC should be much more focused on ensuring its funding is distributed more equitably throughout the country," she said.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/medi...-henderson-20141121-11rkvg.html#ixzz3KPRBzJpo

*A Sydney Bias Perhaps?*


----------



## orr (6 December 2014)

Well it's certainly a lot less Political in a very bad way after the axing of the state based 7:30 programs as of last night. A Red  Letter Day for shonks and spivs crooked councillors and local members. Hats of to the 'NO CUTS TO THE ABC'

And the  Gold Walkley goes to............... 4Corners for their expose' of 'BAD BANKING' CBA style, thanks Adele thanks Team.........
$26 Billion ripped off Australian investors through a plethora of corporate devised scams ...... But of course no need for a Royal Commission into that............


----------



## Logique (6 December 2014)

It was too difficult I suppose for Channel Waleed to axe:

- _ABC News Breakfast_ 
- _First Tuesday Book Club_ 
- _The Drum_ 
- sundry Writers Festivals - doesn't Waleed love these!
- Shaun Micallef shows

Except that Labor/Greens voters watch these..


----------



## banco (6 December 2014)

Logique said:


> It was too difficult I suppose for Channel Waleed to axe:
> 
> - _ABC News Breakfast_
> - _First Tuesday Book Club_
> ...




I for one will miss the hard hitting stories from regional australia about farmers demanding welfare (sorry drought assistance) and the stories about the local town fair. Good thing the abc knows where to cut.


----------



## Tink (9 December 2014)

So where is the article in the ABC regarding the CFMEU in Victoria?
Holding up an Aldi site?

Nothing in sight of course.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28524&page=10&p=852398#post852398


----------



## Logique (16 December 2014)

Channel Waleed, on the hostage drama.



> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...157332119?nk=b4ba6d3757d400b74a55aedaf1393381
> New ugly reality forces Australia to face the truth  - Daily Telegraph,  16 Dec 2014
> 
> ...Prominent Islamic media figure Waleed Aly, while accepting the flag displayed a Muslim message, told the Ten network it was “*a pretty generic sort of flag*”, of a type that “anybody” could acquire.
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (16 December 2014)

> Aly confuses universal availability of such flags with the specifics of its use, particularly in this case. While Presbyterians, Hindus, Catholics and atheists might be able to buy similar flags, they are unlikely to use them in the commission of a terrorist attack...




Sounds like the individual concerned was pretty demented, and would be just as likely to do what he did if he had no religion. 

The courts should have a hard look at themselves letting such people out on bail with the sort of record this guy had.

The ABC and probably other networks always take morbid delight in the degree of coverage that l'il old Australia gets in foreign media on occasions like these. Quite childish really.


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC and probably other networks always take morbid delight in the degree of coverage that l'il old Australia gets in foreign media on occasions like these. Quite childish really.




Yes it reminds me of the cringe worthy coverage of the spent famous visiting to guest on the Logies. Small town thinking.

I was hoping ABC would be channelling news this morning rather than wringing out the last drops. I'm not interested in the hosts playing Columbo with limited facts and ignoring the bleeding obvious.... that's for hard hitting heavy weights like Karl and Koshie on the temporal commercial sites.


----------



## overhang (16 December 2014)

Logique said:


> Channel Waleed, on the hostage drama.




Quite rich coming from the dailytelegraph which is the very definition of gutter journalism.
This was their 2pm edition yesterday, complete fear mongering sensationalised garbage.  It was well reported at the time that this seemed to have nothing to do with IS and yet the dailytelegraph ran with it.
View attachment 60761


It's little surprise though when Murdoch sets the bar for insensitivity.
View attachment 60762


----------



## trainspotter (16 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Sounds like the individual concerned was pretty demented, and would be just as likely to do what he did if he had no religion.
> 
> The courts should have a hard look at themselves letting such people out on bail with the sort of record this guy had.
> 
> The ABC and probably other networks always take morbid delight in the degree of coverage that l'il old Australia gets in foreign media on occasions like these. Quite childish really.




Obama's adviser hit the the nail on the head when he declassified it as a publicity stunt by an individual.


----------



## Logique (17 December 2014)

The Martin Place captor just wanted a generic sort of flag delivered..



> http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-si...s-of-terror-for-captives-20141216-128j5f.html
> Sydney siege ends: More than 16 hours of terror for captives  - Rick Feneley SMH - December 17, 2014
> 
> ...The youngest of his captives, 19-year-old Jarrod Hoffman, from Bondi, called radio 2GB and The Daily Telegraph to relay Monis's demands: he wanted a direct line to Prime Minister Tony Abbott and *an Islamic State flag delivered* to the cafe.  "He says an eye for an eye," Mr Hoffman said...


----------



## Logique (19 December 2014)

Channel Waleed.

Now he has expanded to _The Project_, which the viewers will undoubtedly welcome..both of them.



> http://www.dailylife.com.au/dl-peop...xup-is-agrade-five-stars-20141219-12acri.html
> ...But the ABC's 7:30 host Leigh Sales might've swept in and won the whole thing with this tweet delivered just before she went to air yesterday evening:
> 
> Leigh Sales   @leighsales
> ...


----------



## noco (19 December 2014)

Logique said:


> Channel Waleed.
> 
> Now he has expanded to _The Project_, which the viewers will undoubtedly welcome..both of them.




Now we have a Muslim on the ABC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_Aly

*Waleed Aly (born 15 August 1978) is an Australian radio and television presenter who was born in Melbourne to Egyptian parents.[1]. He has been a member of the executive committee of the Islamic Council of Victoria and has served as the council's head of public affairs. He is a frequent commentator on Australian Muslim affairs. In 2008 he was selected to participate in the Australia 2020 Summit.*


----------



## Calliope (19 December 2014)

overhang said:


> Quite rich coming from the dailytelegraph which is the very definition of gutter journalism.




Sorry to disillusion you overhang, but the SMH sets the definition for gutter tabloid journalism, followed closely by The Age.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2014)

noco said:


> Now we have a Muslim on the ABC
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_Aly
> 
> *Waleed Aly (born 15 August 1978) is an Australian radio and television presenter who was born in Melbourne to Egyptian parents.[1]. He has been a member of the executive committee of the Islamic Council of Victoria and has served as the council's head of public affairs. He is a frequent commentator on Australian Muslim affairs. In 2008 he was selected to participate in the Australia 2020 Summit.*




Waleed Aly has been on the ABC for years.

Have a listen to him sometime, he's a sensible person.


----------



## noco (19 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Waleed Aly has been on the ABC for years.
> 
> Have a listen to him sometime, he's a sensible person.




Maybe as long as it suits him.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2014)

noco said:


> Maybe as long as it suits him.




So you are calling Waleed a terrorist in disguise are you ?


----------



## noco (19 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> So you are calling Waleed a terrorist in disguise are you ?





I don't think he is the nice fellow you portray him to be.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._the_murder_of_three_young_jews_some_broader/

*Nigeria’s Boko Haram group last month kidnapped more than 200 schoolgirls…

As so often when Muslim terrorists strike, Aly was brought on by Channel Ten’s The Project to explain away our fears as “an expert in terrorism”.

“So who is this group exactly?” he was asked.

Not once in his answer did “Muslim” or “Islamic” pass Aly’s lips… “… they might just be vigilantes.”

This was not an atypical approach from Aly.

When jihadists bombed the Boston marathon, he initially jumped to an improbable conclusion, informing Age readers of “the very real suspicion that the perpetrators here are self-styled American patriots” and “our own societies might just be implicated”.

Aly also assured 3AW the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj el-Din el-Hilali, was not a worry even though he’d praised suicide bombers as “heroes” and called the September 11 attacks “God’s work against oppressors”.

Aly said he had no idea who had made Hilali mufti and he represented no one. In fact, Aly’s own Islamic Council of Victoria had voted with other members of the Federation of Islamic Councils of Australia for Hilali to represent their faith.


When Dutch writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali, raised a Muslim, visited Australia to warn against Islamic radicals, Aly mocked her as just “a rock star” doing “actually very, very well out of” her message.

In fact, Hirsi Ali had already had her collaborator, film director Theo van Gogh, slaughtered by a Muslim extremist and was herself forced to live under constant police protection. *


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2014)

noco said:


> I don't think he is the nice fellow you portray him to be.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._the_murder_of_three_young_jews_some_broader/




And I don't think that Andrew Bolt is the nice fellow you portray him to be.


----------



## banco (19 December 2014)

Logique said:


> Channel Waleed.
> 
> Now he has expanded to _The Project_, which the viewers will undoubtedly welcome..both of them.




Say what you will about the ABC but the Project is just embarrassing. They obviously think (know?) their audience has the attention span of a gnat so for every interview they ask two short, prescripted, superficial questions.


----------



## noco (19 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> And I don't think that Andrew Bolt is the nice fellow you portray him to be.




I would much sooner put my life in the hands of Andrew Bolt any day thank you.

So what evidence to have to prove that Andrew Bolt is not a nice fellow...Is it because he is a different colour to you?


----------



## Julia (19 December 2014)

banco said:


> Say what you will about the ABC but the Project is just embarrassing. They obviously think (know?) their audience has the attention span of a gnat so for every interview they ask two short, prescripted, superficial questions.



I've only seen the last quarter of it, but that was more than enough.
I'm surprised Waleed Aly is diminishing his thus far reasonably good reputation to move there from the ABC.

I've only heard him on RN "Drive" program where he has, to my mind, been objective, intelligent and astute, so I'm amazed he's going to such a populist crap program as "The Project".

I wasn't aware of the quotes noco has supplied, and am disappointed to know that.


----------



## banco (19 December 2014)

Julia said:


> I've only seen the last quarter of it, but that was more than enough.
> I'm surprised Waleed Aly is diminishing his thus far reasonably good reputation to move there from the ABC.
> 
> I've only heard him on RN "Drive" program where he has, to my mind, been objective, intelligent and astute, so I'm amazed he's going to such a populist crap program as "The Project".
> ...




I don't think it's that damning that he's reticent to talk about the worst aspects of his religion with outsiders. Incidentally I suspect that as a practicing muslim his views on various issues would mark him as being extremely socially conservative by the ABC's standards but he also seems reluctant to talk about those views.


----------



## Julia (19 December 2014)

banco said:


> I don't think it's that damning that he's reticent to talk about the worst aspects of his religion with outsiders. Incidentally I suspect that as a practicing muslim his views on various issues would mark him as being extremely socially conservative by the ABC's standards but he also seems reluctant to talk about those views.



I didn't even mention anything about him being reticent or otherwise about his religion, so have no idea why you raise this when quoting my earlier post.

I have only commented on him as a presenter where he has shown objectivity, intelligence and perception in interviewing people on all sorts of subjects, nothing to do with religion.


----------



## banco (19 December 2014)

Julia said:


> I didn't even mention anything about him being reticent or otherwise about his religion, so have no idea why you raise this when quoting my earlier post.
> 
> I have only commented on him as a presenter where he has shown objectivity, intelligence and perception in interviewing people on all sorts of subjects, nothing to do with religion.




You said: "I wasn't aware of the quotes noco has supplied, and am disappointed to know that".  The quotes noco highlighted dealt with issues relating to islam.


----------



## Logique (20 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> So you are calling Waleed a terrorist in disguise are you ?



He like his ABC and now _The Project_ colleagues should report the full facts, or risk being considered an apologist.   

He follows the ABC line. The words 'Muslim' and 'Islam' are not to be spoken. Look into the history of the Martin Place captor, it's very clear, and where was the self-regulation within his community? 

We need news from the national broadcaster, not spin.


----------



## orr (20 December 2014)

noco said:


> I don't think he is the nice fellow you portray him to be.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._the_murder_of_three_young_jews_some_broader/
> 
> [/B]




Luv the title of Bolts Blog piece;

Giving Broader Context to the murder of 3 young jews(sic)

For those that pay attention to Bolt, can you tell me if Bolt ever gave a 'Broader' context to the almost two thousand Palestinian civilians, women children, killed/murdered by Israeli Military on their raising of Gaza following on from these murders. And whether he commented as to  these types of reactions having a 'Broader' effect.


----------



## Julia (20 December 2014)

banco said:


> You said: "I wasn't aware of the quotes noco has supplied, and am disappointed to know that".  The quotes noco highlighted dealt with issues relating to islam.






banco said:


> I don't think it's that damning that he's reticent to talk about the worst aspects of his religion with outsiders.




OK.   I thought the quotes from noco's post were somewhat more extreme than him being 'reticent to talk about the worst aspects of his religion' eg



> Aly also assured 3AW the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj el-Din el-Hilali, was not a worry even though he’d praised suicide bombers as “heroes” and called the September 11 attacks “God’s work against oppressors”.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 December 2014)

> Aly also assured 3AW the then Mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj el-Din el-Hilali, was not a worry even though he’d praised suicide bombers as “heroes” and called the September 11 attacks “God’s work against oppressors”.




People like Hilali who make public comments and draw attention to themselves are probably less of a worry than the ones keeping a low profile and flying under the radar of the authorities.


----------



## Calliope (20 December 2014)

Islamists like Monis, Walleed, Sheik Taj el-Din el-Hilali, etc, who make public comments and draw attention to themselves are not a worry according to SR.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 December 2014)

Calliope said:


> Islamists like Monis, Walleed, Sheik Taj el-Din el-Hilali, etc, who make public comments and draw attention to themselves are not a worry according to SR.




Can't you tell the difference between *less* of a worry and *no* worry ?


----------



## noco (20 December 2014)

orr said:


> Luv the title of Bolts Blog piece;
> 
> Giving Broader Context to the murder of 3 young jews(sic)
> 
> For those that pay attention to Bolt, can you tell me if Bolt ever gave a 'Broader' context to the almost two thousand Palestinian civilians, women children, killed/murdered by Israeli Military on their raising of Gaza following on from these murders. And whether he commented as to  these types of reactions having a 'Broader' effect.




Now come on, be fair.....you know why those Palestinians were killed that is if was 2000....They provoked the Israelis with their thousands of rockets attack.....how many Israelis were killed?.......Hamas planted their rockets near hospitals and schools...what would you expect?

I think you are a bit one sided without giving the whole truth.


----------



## chiff (21 December 2014)

Are you saying,Noco,that if my neighbour indulges in criminal activity that the rest of the people in the area should receive collective punishment?
Do you rely on Rupert Murdoch for your sense of morality and decency?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> ....how many Israelis were killed?.




Very few. The Israelis have a missile defence system called Iron Dome that protects them against the majority of missiles that Hammas launches.


----------



## orr (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> Now come on, be fair.....you know why those Palestinians were killed that is if was 2000....They provoked the Israelis with their thousands of rockets attack.....how many Israelis were killed?.......Hamas planted their rockets near hospitals and schools...what would you expect?
> 
> I think you are a bit one sided without giving the whole truth.




I only asked if Bolt offered broader context.... And I'm still interested to know.

     On The Israeli assault on Gaza the Gazians died 20-1 to the Jews. From memory one Israeli has been killed by a rocket in the last couple of years. The following link talks to 'The Rules Of WAR' proportionality, and Israelis Iron Dome that makes rocket attacks ineffectual. Plus gives a Broader context. 

https://theconversation.com/israels...o-sense-and-cannot-secure-a-just-future-29631

And for more context;

https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/rebuilding-gaza-needs-freedom-and-normality-not-just-aid/


or those that choose can remain Bolted to just one side.


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

orr said:


> I only asked if Bolt offered broader context.... And I'm still interested to know.
> 
> On The Israeli assault on Gaza the Gazians died 20-1 to the Jews. From memory one Israeli has been killed by a rocket in the last couple of years. The following link talks to 'The Rules Of WAR' proportionality, and Israelis Iron Dome that makes rocket attacks ineffectual. Plus gives a Broader context.
> 
> ...




Are the Israelis still bombing the Gaza strip?

When they did bomb the Gaza strip what was their reason for doing so?

Has Hamas stopped sending rockets into Israel?

After the Arabs had their backsides kicked in the 6 day war in 1967 ( and I might add they are still licking their wounds), why do you think Israel continued to occupy the West Bank and the Golan Heights?

Was it the Arabs intention then and still is today to wipe Israel off the map?

Israel is surrounded by Arab states and they are always in a tenuous situation of being attacked and if they are attacked, don't they have the right to defend themselves?...If Hamas continues to provoke Israel, I have no sympathy for Hamas, however I do have sympathy for the citizens of Palestine who are the ones who have to suffer from an extremist group like Hamas...I believe Palestine was once a Christian state until it was over run by Islam...The majority of Palestinians people want to live in peace but they are denied peace be the terrorist organization of Hamas.

The ratio of 1 : 20 loss of life  has nothing to do with it. ..We all know as well as your good self, Hamas took advantage of seeking sympathy from the rest of the world by the media attention making the Israelis the bad ones for the loss of life including women and children..Hamas always placed their rocket launchers near hospitals and schools so when Israel attempted to knock out those rocket positions their was some civilians killed.... Hamas could not care less if women and children were the victims....Hams flourished in the media attention....To the best of my knowledge, Israel dropped leaflets and did their best to warn civilians that a bombing raid was imminent. 

Fair go!!!!!


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Very few. The Israelis have a missile defence system called Iron Dome that protects them against the majority of missiles that Hammas launches.




That is because the Israelis are smarter than those dumb Arabs and good on them.

You go tell the Arabs to leave the Israelis alone and then no one gets hurt in the cross fire.


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

chiff said:


> Are you saying,Noco,that if my neighbour indulges in criminal activity that the rest of the people in the area should receive collective punishment?
> Do you rely on Rupert Murdoch for your sense of morality and decency?




I refer you to my posts # 1690 and 1691.

Who are the criminals and who are the victims?


----------



## So_Cynical (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> Are the Israelis still bombing the Gaza strip?
> 
> *When they did bomb the Gaza strip what was their reason for doing so*?




Now that's the question, the real answer is political, anything Hamas does or did has next to nothing to do with it.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> That is because the Israelis are smarter than those dumb Arabs and good on them.
> 
> You go tell the Arabs to leave the Israelis alone and then no one gets hurt in the cross fire.




I'm not going to tell anyone anything, apart from you who made a statement without doing any research.

Just trying to improve your education.


----------



## chiff (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> That is because the Israelis are smarter than those dumb Arabs and good on them.
> 
> You go tell the Arabs to leave the Israelis alone and then no one gets hurt in the cross fire.




For you ,my dear Noco,the killing of civilians is part of a remote football game.The Nazis took dealt collective punishment on unrelated civilians when their interests were threatened.
Once again ,do you need Rupert Murdoch to guide your thoughts on morality and humanity.Evidence on this forum suggests that you do.


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> Now that's the question, the real answer is political, anything Hamas does or did has next to nothing to do with it.




Could you be more specific.....your statement does not make a lot of sense.


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm not going to tell anyone anything, apart from you who made a statement without doing any research.
> 
> Just trying to improve your education.




Rumpy, you are talking in riddles again....what research are you talking about or are you baffled for an answer knowing full well what I have stated is what really happened?


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

chiff said:


> For you ,my dear Noco,the killing of civilians is part of a remote football game.The Nazis took dealt collective punishment on unrelated civilians when their interests were threatened.
> Once again ,do you need Rupert Murdoch to guide your thoughts on morality and humanity.Evidence on this forum suggests that you do.




Cliff, you also seems to be off the track and making some audacious comment unrelated to what I was commenting on....What has the Nazis or Rupert Murdock got to do with guiding my morality and humanity.

Please stop romancing with yourself...you also don't have the answer, so stop making these outlandish statements in order to discredit my character......That is a cheap way of you doing things in your mind.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> Rumpy, you are talking in riddles again....what research are you talking about or are you baffled for an answer knowing full well what I have stated is what really happened?




You seemed to be insinuating that a lot of Israelis were killed by Palestinian rockets, when in fact that is not the case.

That's the lack of research I was referring to.


----------



## noco (21 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> You seemed to be insinuating that a lot of Israelis were killed by Palestinian rockets, when in fact that is not the case.
> 
> That's the lack of research I was referring to.





I am well aware of all that Rumpy...I am well aware there were a lot more Palestinians killed thanks to Hamas and I am not denying it so what is your point?

I don't need to do any research....I know full well what happened.

I am sure the majority of Palestinians do not have a lot of time for Hamas who are a terrorist organization and who could not give a hoot about the Palestinians. I am sure you know it but won't admit it.

May I ask why you are pro Hamas and anti Israel?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2014)

noco said:


> May I ask why you are pro Hamas and anti Israel?




Faults on both sides noco, but the Israelis have the might of the US on their side, with all the money and arms sent by Jews in the US to Israel, so the poor Palestinians don't have much comeback against that sort of strength.

What else can they do but fire a few rockets every now and then ? It never achieves anything but I suppose they are justifying themselves to their supporters.

Meanwhile Israel keeps expanding their borders and pushing the Palestinians out. No one seems to want much to do with them, and so people keep getting thrown out of their houses onto the streets.


----------



## noco (22 December 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Faults on both sides noco, but the Israelis have the might of the US on their side, with all the money and arms sent by Jews in the US to Israel, so the poor Palestinians don't have much comeback against that sort of strength.
> 
> What else can they do but fire a few rockets every now and then ? It never achieves anything but I suppose they are justifying themselves to their supporters.
> 
> Meanwhile Israel keeps expanding their borders and pushing the Palestinians out. No one seems to want much to do with them, and so people keep getting thrown out of their houses onto the streets.




Here is a break down of USA foreign aid to various countries including Israel....Note the amount given to Egypt a Muslim country.

Now who supplies Hamas with those 6000 rockets which they fire into Israel over a short period of time from around the hospitals and schools in the Gaza strip? The poor Palestinians don't have money. 

The poor Palestinians would much prefer to live in peace and would do so without the Hamas terrorist organization interfering with their lives.. 

http://geography.about.com/od/lists...ecedf596-02cd-4d1b-a513-ac8c08f928a1-0-ab_gsb


----------



## SirRumpole (22 December 2014)

noco said:


> Here is a break down of USA foreign aid to various countries including Israel....Note the amount given to Egypt a Muslim country.
> 
> Now who supplies Hamas with those 6000 rockets which they fire into Israel over a short period of time from around the hospitals and schools in the Gaza strip? The poor Palestinians don't have money.
> 
> ...




Only 10 years out of date.


----------



## Logique (27 December 2014)

banco said:


> I for one will miss the hard hitting stories from regional australia about farmers demanding welfare (sorry drought assistance) and the stories about the local town fair. Good thing the abc knows where to cut.



Separate sectional from national interest. 

Your view on the international buy-up of Australian farms and pastoral leases is...what?


----------



## So_Cynical (27 December 2014)

noco said:


> Here is a break down of USA foreign aid to various countries including Israel....Note the amount given to Egypt a Muslim country.




Wow its almost as if you have no idea at all - Egypt gets that money as part of the The Camp David Accords.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_Accords



			
				Wiki said:
			
		

> The agreement also resulted in the United States committing to several billion dollars worth of annual subsidies to the governments of both Israel and Egypt, subsidies which continue to this day, and are given as a mixture of grants and aid packages committed to purchasing U.S. materiel. From 1979 (the year of the peace agreement) to 1997, *Egypt received military aid of US$1.3 billion annually*, which also helped modernize the Egyptian military.[22] (This is beyond economic, humanitarian, and other aid, which has totaled more than US$25 billion.) Eastern-supplied until 1979, Egypt now received American weaponry such as the M1A1 Abrams Tank, AH-64 Apache gunship and the F-16 fighter jet. In comparison, Israel has received $3 billion annually since 1985 in grants and military aid packages.[23]




-----------------------



noco said:


> Now who supplies Hamas with those 6000 rockets which they fire into Israel over a short period of time from around the hospitals and schools in the Gaza strip? The poor Palestinians don't have money.




Consensus is that Iranian and Saudi money pays for the rockets, they are smuggled in via Egypt...why do they do this? i imagine its to annoy the f!ck outa the Israelis and keep the dream alive, make sure that there are consequences to Israeli expansion.



noco said:


> The poor Palestinians would much prefer to live in peace and would do so without the Hamas terrorist organization interfering with their lives.




Ever heard of the concept of divide and rule? - a simple strategy, the last thing the Israelis want is for the Palestinians to get together again...ask yourself who has the most to gain from a divided Palestine?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule

-------------------------

This is all pretty basic stuff noco, please do a little reading.


----------



## noco (27 December 2014)

So_Cynical said:


> Wow its almost as if you have no idea at all - Egypt gets that money as part of the The Camp David Accords.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_Accords
> 
> ...




*Elements of this technique involve:

    creating or encouraging divisions among the subjects to prevent alliances that could challenge the sovereign
    aiding and promoting those who are willing to cooperate with the sovereign
    fostering distrust and enmity between local rulers
    encouraging meaningless expenditures that reduce the capability for political and military spending

Historically, this strategy was used in many different ways by empires seeking to expand their territories.

The concept is also mentioned as a strategy for market action in economics to get the most out of the players in a competitive market.*

That is pretty ancient material...you seem to have gone back to the Roman Empire and Jesus Christ's days..

You could not call Israel an Empire......The Palestinians were OK until Hamas took over and when the Arabs tried to wipe Israel off the map in the 6 day war in 1967...if that had not taken place the situation could have been quite different...The Jews are a different culture to Islam and the Arabs were not happy with Israel being in that location among all the Arab states.


----------



## banco (28 December 2014)

Noco, writing his posts:


----------



## noco (28 December 2014)

banco said:


> Noco, writing his posts:
> 
> View attachment 60896




Sarcasm is sick wit from the uneducated.


----------



## Logique (3 January 2015)

More blundering by the national broadcaster.

ABC New Year's broadcast rights up for tender - January 3, 2015
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ast-rights-up-for-tender-20150102-12gxdm.html

The ABC says it can't afford regional services. But there's plenty of money for an amateur hour handi-cam broadcast of the New Years Eve fireworks.

Don't like Julia Zemiro's chances of working on the ABC again. Western civilization will try to struggle on.


----------



## Logique (28 January 2015)

Waleed is going to have to redouble his efforts to get the ABC through this crisis.

There seems to have been an oversight with the ABC Asian Cup coverage - Waleed is absent from the commentary team with Stephanie, Paul Okon and the boys.  It's a major hit to the credibility of the so-called expert panel.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...aph/comments/one_devoted_viewer/#commentsmore
> Tim Blair  - Tuesday, January 27, 2015
> 
> Audiences are down at the ABC:
> ...


----------



## Tisme (28 January 2015)

Logique said:


> Waleed is going to have to redouble his efforts to get the ABC through this crisis.
> 
> There seems to have been an oversight with the ABC Asian Cup coverage - Waleed is absent from the commentary team with Stephanie, Paul Okon and the boys.  It's a major hit to the credibility of the so-called expert panel.




I must say when the soccer drivel comes on the ABC news show I flick over to something more interesting like the infomercials like : Abtronics, Shark vacuum cleaners....anything but the droning on and on about a boring, boring game full of people with non Australian accents. I'm the same with the tennis and golf. Now lawn bowls, there is an exiting game


----------



## SirRumpole (28 January 2015)

Tisme said:


> I must say when the soccer drivel comes on the ABC news show I flick over to something more interesting like the infomercials like : Abtronics, Shark vacuum cleaners....anything but the droning on and on about a boring, boring game full of people with non Australian accents. I'm the same with the tennis and golf. Now lawn bowls, there is an exiting game




Snooker for me


----------



## drsmith (28 January 2015)

If the ABC were in charge of the RBA, they'd be cutting interest rates on the headline inflation rate rather than the underlying rate.


----------



## Bintang (28 January 2015)

drsmith said:


> If the ABC were in charge of the RBA, they'd be cutting interest rates on the headline inflation rate rather than the underlying rate.




And if the ABC were in charge of border control we would have no borders.

Could go on and on  ad infinitum …..


----------



## Tink (17 February 2015)

Sarah Ferguson interview with Joe Hockey 'breached ABC bias guidelines'

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...c-bias-guidelines-review-20150216-13gbmj.html

As for her husband, Tony Jones last night, he was in his element on the Malcolm Turnbull show.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...fect-performance/story-fni0xqrb-1227222003812


----------



## Bintang (17 February 2015)

Tink said:


> Sarah Ferguson interview with Joe Hockey 'breached ABC bias guidelines'




That's funny.
I would have thought that the only way anyone could breach 'ABC bias guidelines' is by not being biased enough


----------



## SirRumpole (17 February 2015)

Tink said:


> Sarah Ferguson interview with Joe Hockey 'breached ABC bias guidelines'






> One of the ABC's most acclaimed journalists, Sarah Ferguson, was so hostile towards Treasurer Joe Hockey in an interview last year that she breached the broadcaster's bias guidelines, *an ABC-commissioned editorial review* has found.




At least they have the guts to respond to criticisms unlike the commercial media who are always right (and always Right).


----------



## bellenuit (17 February 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> At least they have the guts to respond to criticisms unlike the commercial media who are always right (and always Right).




_The finding has been rejected by ABC News director Kate Torney and has angered some senior ABC journalists. Fairfax Media understands Ms Ferguson argued internally that she stands by the interview._

http://news.smh.com.au/federal-poli...c-bias-guidelines-review-20150216-13gbmj.html

I guess the ABC is always right (and always Left)


----------



## Tisme (17 February 2015)

Tink said:


> As for her husband, Tony Jones last night, he was in his element on the Malcolm Turnbull show.




I'm sure there are Right wingers out there who would swear the ABC were biased to Labor because they coerced Malcolm into freedom of expression....they didn't fool me though, I could see the hand up the back of his shirt.


----------



## noco (19 February 2015)

This link just confirms how the ABC operate. They are so ruthless.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e-and-relentless/story-fnihsr9v-1227224494145

The ABC is run by the Fabian society which embraces communism, The Greens, the Labor party, Insiders, QandA, the Drum , Media Watch, Fact Check, GETUP and the good old Guardian News paper....They all have their lefty plants and ARE biased towards the Labor Party.

These organizations will rubbish the conservative side of politics at every opportunity but will overlook any wrond doings of the Green/Labor left wing socialist.

Their ideology is, control the media and you control the people.  

Fairness is a dirty word with the ABC


----------



## Macquack (19 February 2015)

noco said:


> Their ideology is, control the media and you control the people.




That is Murdoch's ideology.

Didn't hear Bolt squealing  like a scolded cat about News Limited's "extreme and relentless bias" against Julia Gillard.



> the ABC, our biggest media organisation, with four TV stations, five radio stations, an online newspaper and a publishing house.




I think Murdoch is jealous, he is not numero uno.

One of the comments on the article -


> It is because the ABC seeks to keep the Australian public informed that this paper (Courier Mail) devotes so much space to discrediting it.


----------



## IFocus (19 February 2015)

noco said:


> This link just confirms how the ABC operate. They are so ruthless.
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e-and-relentless/story-fnihsr9v-1227224494145
> ...




Really?

Have we forgotten what Turnbull was like as leader?



> Malcolm Turnbull may be favoured to replace Tony Abbott as Liberal leader, but a look at polling history reminds us how badly the Turnbull leadership experiment ended the first time, write Peter Lewis and Jackie Woods.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-18/lewis-woods-have-we-forgotten-what-turnbull-was-like/6137198


----------



## noco (19 February 2015)

IFocus said:


> Really?
> 
> Have we forgotten what Turnbull was like as leader?
> 
> ...




What is the relevance of Malcom Turnbull to my post?.....It does not make sense.


----------



## sails (20 February 2015)

Macquack said:


> That is Murdoch's ideology.
> 
> Didn't hear Bolt squealing  like a scolded cat about News Limited's "extreme and relentless bias" against Julia Gillard.
> 
> ...




Murdoch is not using taxpayer funds to finance his business and needs to sell his news to survive in business.  You are not comparing apples with apples.


----------



## Tisme (20 February 2015)

Im sure the tax payer does subsidise the likes of Newscorp, especially via creative accounting and tax minimisation


----------



## Macquack (20 February 2015)

sails said:


> Murdoch is not using taxpayer funds to finance his business and *needs to sell his news to survive in business*.



Do you remember the "News of the World" disgrace. Great business model there Rupert. It was working beautifully until he got caught out for blatant criminal activity.



sails said:


> You are not comparing apples with apples.




How about "the pot calling the kettle black"?


----------



## Tink (21 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> Im sure the tax payer does subsidise the likes of Newscorp, especially via creative accounting and tax minimisation




If that is the case, Tisme, let's try it.

Privatise the ABC and let's see how long they can float.


----------



## Ijustnewit (25 February 2015)

The ABC has slumped to even more lows . Today they are using a Shaun Micallef comedy skit on the Medicare Co Payment as NEWS on NEWS 24 and the Midday NEWS. WTF. Great use of tax payers monies. If I wanted to see Micallef's poor and less than  funny skits I would tune into his show. But I do expect to see them re run as NEWS on the News programs. I have sent a letter of complaint . It won't have any affect though .


----------



## noco (25 February 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> The ABC has slumped to even more lows . Today they are using a Shaun Micallef comedy skit on the Medicare Co Payment as NEWS on NEWS 24 and the Midday NEWS. WTF. Great use of tax payers monies. If I wanted to see Micallef's poor and less than  funny skits I would tune into his show. But I do expect to see them re run as NEWS on the News programs. I have sent a letter of complaint . It won't have any affect though .




The ABC is the propaganda machine for the Green/Labor left wing socialists......what else would you expect?


----------



## Bintang (25 February 2015)

noco said:


> The ABC is the propaganda machine for the Green/Labor left wing socialists......what else would you expect?




Noco, you are just biased.
I think I might be too because Macquack told me so.
I'm still reeling from the accusation. Very hurtful it was.


----------



## Tisme (25 February 2015)

Has the ABC carried out a fact check on their reporting to see the accuracy of past "political" articles?


----------



## noco (25 February 2015)

Bintang said:


> Noco, you are just biased.
> I think I might be too because Macquack told me so.
> I'm still reeling from the accusation. Very hurtful it was.




Yes I am biased because it is factual..The ABC is the propaganda machine for the Green/Labor left wing socialists, just as GETUP, Insiders, QandA, Fact Check, the Guardian,  Media Watch are all tarred with the same brush.

You are not going to tell me the ABC are not biased towards the Green/Labor Party.

The ABC never miss an opportunity to discredit the LNP all in the cause of Labor.


----------



## Julia (25 February 2015)

noco, it might be more useful to observe that bias exists on the part of some programs and individuals, rather than across the board.

On 7.30 for example, perhaps I'm not sufficiently discerning but I find Leigh Sales is very similar in her approach whether she's interviewing someone from Labor or Liberal.  She is persistent yet avoids the aggression that made Sarah Ferguson so unpleasant.

This is in absolute contrast to the extreme combined bias in RN Breakfast where Fran Kelly, Alison Carabine and Paul Bongiorno engage in a frenzy of horror about the government, occasionally moderated by the more rational Michelle Grattan who brings genuine experience and some objectivity to the discussion.

Scott Morrison (who I can understand some people find a bit too 'in your face') offered a strong performance on 7.30 this evening.   No ums and ahs from this minister.


----------



## drsmith (25 February 2015)

Julia said:


> Scott Morrison (who I can understand some people find a bit too 'in your face') offered a strong performance on 7.30 this evening.   No ums and ahs from this minister.



It was a confident performance by a minister on top of his brief. It was also professional by Leigh Sales in letting him answer the questions.

The segment that came before that illustrated broadly the current disincentive of high EMTR's in broader tax/transfer.

I just hope the government doesn't tip so much money into childcare as to drive the price.


----------



## noco (26 February 2015)

Julia said:


> noco, it might be more useful to observe that bias exists on the part of some programs and individuals, rather than across the board.
> 
> On 7.30 for example, perhaps I'm not sufficiently discerning but I find Leigh Sales is very similar in her approach whether she's interviewing someone from Labor or Liberal.  She is persistent yet avoids the aggression that made Sarah Ferguson so unpleasant.
> 
> ...




Julia, She maybe an isolated case in some circumstances...Was she interviewing Scott Morrison?...I would say he would be a hard nut to crack.

You must confess though, in the main, 95% of their documentary shows are very blatantly biased towards the Labor Party.


----------



## Julia (26 February 2015)

noco said:


> You must confess though, in the main, 95% of their documentary shows are very blatantly biased towards the Labor Party.



Actually, noco, 95% of their documentary shows that I've seen or heard across radio and television, have nothing to do with politics.
"Four Corners", eg, would have to be one of the best programs across all channels and Radio National do some terrific doco stuff also.


----------



## noco (26 February 2015)

Julia said:


> Actually, noco, 95% of their documentary shows that I've seen or heard across radio and television, have nothing to do with politics.
> "Four Corners", eg, would have to be one of the best programs across all channels and Radio National do some terrific doco stuff also.




Sorry Julia, I should clarify that into shows where politics are involved.


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2015)

Tink said:


> If that is the case, Tisme, let's try it.
> 
> Privatise the ABC and let's see how long they can float.




But then it wouldn't be a public broadcaster, merely another player in already low margin industry. To me the ABC fulfils a role that is different to the commercial broadcasters where it can insult, amuse, educate, etc without having to worry about consumerism and ratings.

Personally I hate the likes of Rage, I don't like the pomposity of the "breakfast show", Tony Jones irritates as much as he entertains me and the idiots representing the LNP who think they can match it with the Lab brains trust is cringeworthy and shouldn't be allowed.

The ABC is a "camel" station, derived by a committee, run by a committee with a very strong public service ethos under pinning it. That's its differentiation from the snots and juveniles who front the commercial shows and go away to South African beaches making out they are surviving something.


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> It was a confident performance by a minister on top of his brief. It was also professional by Leigh Sales in letting him answer the questions.
> 
> The segment that came before that illustrated broadly the current disincentive of high EMTR's in broader tax/transfer.
> 
> I just hope the government doesn't tip so much money into childcare as to drive the price.




I must admit I was rather stunned he could actually speak about +ves rather than the same old hackneyed blame the Labor people recursives that make the LNP pollies look like snivelling twats from six and seventh grades.

He needs a "colours" consultant to revamp his camphor in the closet look:- funky glasses, get rid of the smug curling lip, tell the truth now and again, recognise that nearly half the population preferred the Labor Party over his politics and try some dialogue and negotiation with them instead.

Candy canes and unicorns stuff.


----------



## drsmith (26 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> I must admit I was rather stunned he could actually speak about +ves rather than the same old hackneyed blame the Labor people recursives that make the LNP pollies look like snivelling twats from six and seventh grades.
> 
> He needs a "colours" consultant to revamp his camphor in the closet look:- funky glasses, get rid of the smug curling lip, tell the truth now and again, recognise that nearly half the population preferred the Labor Party over his politics and try some dialogue and negotiation with them instead.
> 
> Candy canes and unicorns stuff.



While he didn't meet make it on your prevention index from his time in immigration, I'm still at a loss at what in your mind does. You've had some time to think about that now.

In being on top of his brief, he's made a good start in social security.


----------



## basilio (26 February 2015)

The ABC is only appreciated (if at all) when it runs out investigative journalism stories that expose serious issues in Australia.

This weeks offering for example focused attention on the Unemployment industry and the institutionalized widespread fraud of seemingly many of the major players.

Short story is the job provider networks have cost taxpayers $18b attempting to help the unemployed find jobs.  The reality is 90% of the unemployed are simply parked in a file, routine rorting of government funds by false claims, widespread forgery and so on.

Interestingly neither Labour nor Liberal governments have had the guts to bring this industry to task. 

Of course when 4 Corners gets into more meaty subjects like  Children Overboard one can guarantee a keen political interest and criticism..

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/four-corners/NC1504H004S00 

Scandal in the Federal Government jobs program


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> While he didn't meet make it on your prevention index from his time in immigration, I'm still at a loss at what in your mind does. You've had some time to think about that now.
> 
> In being on top of his brief, he's made a good start in social security.




I doubt you have any interest in points of view that aren't LNP biased. Any opinion I posted about this fellow would be seen as unsavoury in your LNP saturated world....truth or dare  

I'm willing to give Scott cudos for being straight up and honest. Upto now I observed him to be transparently slippery and uncooperative to the broader community (IMO).


----------



## drsmith (27 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm willing to give Scott cudos for being straight up and honest. Upto now I observed him to be transparently slippery and uncooperative to the broader community (IMO).



What about cudos for stopping the boats or alternatively offer something else that's up to the measure on your prevention index.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> What about cudos for stopping the boats or alternatively offer something else that's up to the measure on your prevention index.




See the thing is that you predicate the argument on your own  most important determinant. There is no space in your argument for ambivalence or opposite preferred outcomes. 

Why am I compelled to agree with stopping the boats based on some political party dogma? Why is it OK to set up nurseries of future antagonists to our society by putting dispossessed people in internment camps. By simple logic if a person is prepared to boat it into Australia with limited means, how long before another attempt once cashed up with better means and a shorter projected route, except this time scores need to be settled.... worse the offspring of those who have suffered incarceration and camp fever.


----------



## drsmith (27 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> See the thing is that you predicate the argument on your own  most important determinant. There is no space in your argument for ambivalence or opposite preferred outcomes.
> 
> Why am I compelled to agree with stopping the boats based on some political party dogma? Why is it OK to set up nurseries of future antagonists to our society by putting dispossessed people in internment camps. By simple logic if a person is prepared to boat it into Australia with limited means, how long before another attempt once cashed up with better means and a shorter projected route, except this time scores need to be settled.... worse the offspring of those who have suffered incarceration and camp fever.



You attack the current solution and the minister that was responsible for it so the question remains a simple one.

What's your alternative ?


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> What's your alternative ?




Hope for a political party who will think of something that can be constitutionally implemented, reflects our professed civilised society and that isn't economically driven French Devil's island stuff. I have a feeling we will have to wait until the Brits do our thinking for us as usual.


----------



## Bintang (27 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> Hope for a political party who will think of something that can be constitutionally implemented, reflects our professed civilised society and that isn't economically driven French Devil's island stuff. I have a feeling we will have to wait until the Brits do our thinking for us as usual.




Which of the Brits? the Labor, the Conservative, the Lib Dems or UKIP?
Perhaps you should check out a shariah law controlled UK no-go zone before wishing for a Brit type 'solution'.

But bottom line is you clearly don't have an alternative to offer.


----------



## Bintang (28 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> I have a feeling we will have to wait until the Brits do our thinking for us as usual.




While Tisme waits for the Brits to “_do our thinking for us_” it's interesting that the UKIP party is heading to the UK’s May general election with an immigration policy based on ‘Australia having done their thinking for them’.

*'We can't accommodate you' - Farage rolls out immigration policy*
_“Immigration policy in the UK should *mimic the Australian-style points system*, UKIP leader Nigel Farage told radio listeners on Monday, providing early insight into the party’s 2015 manifesto.”_

So I guess the Brits Tisme is referring to would have to be from the other UK political parties who have allowed an open–door policy - the very policy which UKIP is campaigning against.


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2015)

Bintang said:


> Which of the Brits? the Labor, the Conservative, the Lib Dems or UKIP?
> Perhaps you should check out a shariah law controlled UK no-go zone before wishing for a Brit type 'solution'.
> 
> But bottom line is you clearly don't have an alternative to offer.




Should I? Who decided I have to provide a solution?


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2015)

Bintang said:


> While Tisme waits for the Brits to “_do our thinking for us_” it's interesting that the UKIP party is heading to the UK’s May general election with an immigration policy based on ‘Australia having done their thinking for them’.
> 
> *'We can't accommodate you' - Farage rolls out immigration policy*
> _“Immigration policy in the UK should *mimic the Australian-style points system*, UKIP leader Nigel Farage told radio listeners on Monday, providing early insight into the party’s 2015 manifesto.”_
> ...





Howse the view up there on your high horse Bintang? 

I don't know why you are upset, the LNP has been taking it's orders from the Brit Conserves forever.


----------



## Bintang (28 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> Howse the view up there on your high horse Bintang?
> 
> I don't know why you are upset, the LNP has been taking it's orders from the Brit Conserves forever.




Not upset at all. Just puzzled by your reasoning since the Brit Conserves are acting more like our Labor party on immigration  - ie. open the borders and let the hordes invade.


----------



## drsmith (1 March 2015)

Tisme said:


> Should I? Who decided I have to provide a solution?



To use the words of a fine minister of this government,

We live in the hope that there's more to your good self than just unfunded moral empathy.


----------



## drsmith (2 March 2015)

Side articles to the ABC's George Brandis censured by Senate news article,



> The speech Abbott could have made about Triggs
> Crabb: Triggs takes punches that should be hitting Labor
> Fact check: Triggs correct on children in detention
> The Drum: Brandis v Triggs
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...ate-after-criticism-of-gillian-triggs/6274294


----------



## basilio (3 March 2015)

Thanks Dr Smith for highlighting the excellent series of articles on the ABC website that explain just why Senator Brandis was censured by the Senate.

The article by Ben Saul *Barrister and Professor of International Law at Sydney University* offers a detailed conservative legal analysis of why the Governments and Senator Brandis approach deserved to be censured. 

In fact it was written before Senator Brandis attacked Gillian Triggs in the Senator estimate committee



> *Attacks on Commission unbefitting our government*
> Opinion
> By Ben Saul
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-16/saul-attacks-on-commission-unbefitting-our-government/6115078


----------



## noco (3 March 2015)

basilio said:


> Thanks Dr Smith for highlighting the excellent series of articles on the ABC website that explain just why Senator Brandis was censured by the Senate.
> 
> The article by Ben Saul *Barrister and Professor of International Law at Sydney University* offers a detailed conservative legal analysis of why the Governments and Senator Brandis approach deserved to be censured.
> 
> ...




None of this would have happened in the first place had the Green/Labor left wing socialist not opened the boarders to people smugglers and allowed 50,000 illegals in to Australia, costing the tax payers well over $11 billion and climbing..
Gillian Triggs is a pawn in the Labor Party political game...There is no doubt she was instructed by Bowen and Burke to with hold the report until after the 2013 election....Triggs never said a word about the 2000 kids in detention and the hundreds who lost their lives at sea under Green/Labor Party 2008/2013. She went on to report how Labor processed these illegals faster than the Liberals and it was because the detention centers were full to over flowing and Labor released them into the community without proper checks.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2015)

basilio said:


> Thanks Dr Smith for highlighting the excellent series of articles on the ABC website that explain just why Senator Brandis was censured by the Senate.
> 
> The article by Ben Saul *Barrister and Professor of International Law at Sydney University* offers a detailed conservative legal analysis of why the Governments and Senator Brandis approach deserved to be censured.
> 
> In fact it was written before Senator Brandis attacked Gillian Triggs in the Senator estimate committee




It's an odd thing that people will not see what they don't want to see. Once the political die is cast, it takes immense self determination to change the tribal loyalty and associated obduration.

We all know the reaction when the guilty are confronted with the truth of an unsavoury act:- shout foul then blame someone else, shoot the messenger. But if it's one of our inner circle at fault we make mental apologies and excuses to forgive and perpetuate lie for them.

I don't know why we compromise our good selves to protect people we don't even know, but when it comes to politics people are so disappointing. I don't like the pompous way Triggs handles herself, but I don't think she deserves being used as a tool to drive the polls up.


----------



## drsmith (3 March 2015)

basilio said:


> Thanks Dr Smith for highlighting the excellent series of articles on the ABC website that explain just why Senator Brandis was censured by the Senate.
> 
> The article by Ben Saul *Barrister and Professor of International Law at Sydney University* offers a detailed conservative legal analysis of why the Governments and Senator Brandis approach deserved to be censured.
> 
> ...



What exactly is the next closest thing to a judicial office ?

Is it a judicial office or not ?

I can add a few headlines to the ABC's collection,



> Detention centres are a prison, well, not quiet.
> Armed guards at Xmas Island detention centre, again, well, not quiet.
> Children in detention is the broader issue and not people smuggling itself with all the consequences that it brings.
> Calling an enquiry into children in detention while the government that drew the boats to our shores is still in office is political.
> The 10-year anniversary of a previous enquiry is more important to the HRC than people including children drowning at sea.


----------



## IFocus (3 March 2015)

drsmith said:


> What exactly is the next closest thing to a judicial office ?
> 
> Is it a judicial office or not ?
> 
> I can add a few headlines to the ABC's collection,




Thanks for that DR you wont find them over at the Liberal Daily


----------



## drsmith (3 March 2015)

IFocus said:


> Thanks for that DR you wont find them over at the Liberal Daily



You could try to answer the questions they raise.

From what you refer to as the Lib Daily,



> Now the ABC has even used its Fact Checking Unit to check one of the few points made by Triggs that no one challenges and that adds nothing to the debate.
> 
> “Correct” finds the ABC after examining Triggs’s statement that under the Coalition children, on average, have spent longer in detention.
> 
> ...




http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg.../on_2gb_tonight_sanity_restored/#commentsmore


----------



## noco (3 March 2015)

drsmith said:


> You could try to answer the questions they raise.
> 
> From what you refer to as the Lib Daily,
> 
> ...




From what I see about the situation where Triggs stated the Green/Labor removed the kids faster from detention than the Liberal Party was because the detention centers were full to overflowing and the Green/Labor coalition processed them without thorough check and released them into the community to make room for new arrivals....It makes me boil when I see how get things so distorted from the truth.


----------



## Bintang (3 March 2015)

noco said:


> ....It makes me boil when I see how get things so distorted from the truth.




No use getting boiled up. Truth is just a victim of politics.
As George Orwell said a long time ago:

_“Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful ……”

“In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

“The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
_


----------



## noco (4 March 2015)

Bintang said:


> No use getting boiled up. Truth is just a victim of politics.
> As George Orwell said a long time ago:
> 
> _“Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful ……”
> ...




How true...how very true.

But the naive including some ASF members believe the crap put out by the ABC, SBS, GETUP, MEDIA WATCH, QandA. Insiders, the good old Guardian communist newspaper and Fairfax.

The Green/Labor left wing socialist party have influence over all of them.

Control the media outlets and you control the people.


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2015)

Bintang said:


> No use getting boiled up. Truth is just a victim of politics.
> As George Orwell said a long time ago:
> 
> _“Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful ……”
> ...





I'm sure neither side of politics has a monopoly on truth, but Noco's assumptions of lax processing by govt bureaucrats in Gillard/Rudd eras is just that = an assumption unless there are substantive facts, and no one is going to find facts in media like QLD's Courier Mail.


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2015)

noco said:


> How true...how very true.
> 
> But the naive including some ASF members believe the crap put out by the ABC, SBS, GETUP, MEDIA WATCH, QandA. Insiders, the good old Guardian communist newspaper and Fairfax.
> 
> ...




Are you saying all those are liars  because they are meritocracies rather than the LNP's plutocratic benefactor Mr Murdoch ?


----------



## noco (4 March 2015)

Tisme said:


> Are you saying all those are liars  because they are meritocracies rather than the LNP's plutocratic benefactor Mr Murdoch ?




I am saying it is those organizations I mentioned, who exaggerate and stretch the truth to discredit the Liberal Party and praise the Green/Labor coalition where possible.....If you are trying to tell me they are not biased towards the Labor Party, then you are in denial.


----------



## basilio (4 March 2015)

noco said:


> From what I see about the situation where Triggs stated the Green/Labor removed the kids faster from detention than the Liberal Party was because the detention centers were full to overflowing and the Green/Labor coalition processed them without thorough check and released them into the community to make room for new arrivals....It makes me boil when I see how get things so distorted from the truth.




There is real problem Noco whenever you use an Andrew Bolt story as a reference for a story.

*Andrew has no ethics.* He repeatedly, distorts, deceives, dissembles. (In my view)  no one in their right mind would accept Andrews version of reality unless there is external evidence.


----------



## drsmith (4 March 2015)

basilio said:


> There is real problem Noco whenever you use an Andrew Bolt story as a reference for a story.
> 
> *Andrew has no ethics.* He repeatedly, distorts, deceives, dissembles. (In my view)  no one in their right mind would accept Andrews version of reality unless there is external evidence.



You might want to take another look.

In taking aim, you're trying to shoot the wrong messenger.


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2015)

noco said:


> I am saying it is those organizations I mentioned, who exaggerate and stretch the truth to discredit the Liberal Party and praise the Green/Labor coalition where possible.....If you are trying to tell me they are not biased towards the Labor Party, then you are in denial.




 My cynical agrees in part with you Noco. The other parts says that the twisting of facts and the lying is not just from Lab sympathisers, but also from the other side too. 

You must admit you tend to substantiate your arguments with carefully selected articles that agree with your politics, but offer no offset argument. It's not just you, it's everyone who does it. 

It's the people in govt who need to be scrutinised, not necessarily the opposition; that is why the criticisms of Abbott and coy, they are the board of directors who are supposed to be running the show, not behaving like they are in opposition.

The ministry seems to always be banging on about Labor and deficits, but the fiscal policies are continuously being changed to suit prevailing conditions, otherwise we would be operating on a Menzies budget from the 50's or earlier.

The mainstream media is always looking to be sensational and there isn't much purchase in pursuing the Labor party when the decision makers are LNP.


----------



## noco (4 March 2015)

basilio said:


> There is real problem Noco whenever you use an Andrew Bolt story as a reference for a story.
> 
> *Andrew has no ethics.* He repeatedly, distorts, deceives, dissembles. (In my view)  no one in their right mind would accept Andrews version of reality unless there is external evidence.




And of course the ABC and all their associated programs don't distort the truth.

I know who would sooner trust with the truth and it ain't the ABC mate.


----------



## Bintang (4 March 2015)

Tisme said:


> Are you saying all those are liars  because they are meritocracies rather than the LNP's plutocratic benefactor Mr Murdoch ?






noco said:


> I am saying it is those organizations I mentioned, who exaggerate and stretch the truth to discredit the Liberal Party and praise the Green/Labor coalition where possible.....






basilio said:


> There is real problem Noco whenever you use an Andrew Bolt story as a reference for a story.
> 
> *Andrew has no ethics.* He repeatedly, distorts, deceives, dissembles. (In my view)  no one in their right mind would accept Andrews version of reality unless there is external evidence.






Tisme said:


> ……… the twisting of facts and the lying is not just from Lab sympathisers, but also from the other side too.
> 
> The mainstream media is always looking to be sensational and there isn't much purchase in pursuing the Labor party when the decision makers are LNP.






noco said:


> I know who would sooner trust with the truth and it ain't the ABC mate.




Interesting discussion.
So does anyone have any suggestions as to where we can find the truth on anything? 
We are bombarded everyday with information from so many sources. How can any individual be sure he/she is not being fooled by what is said or published?   - whether it be mainstream newspapers/TV, statements by politicians, ABC etc….


----------



## noco (4 March 2015)

Bintang said:


> Interesting discussion.
> So does anyone have any suggestions as to where we can find the truth on anything?
> We are bombarded everyday with information from so many sources. How can any individual be sure he/she is not being fooled by what is said or published?   - whether it be mainstream newspapers/TV, statements by politicians, ABC etc….




Just believe in half of what your hear and  a quarter of what you read and you will be some where the mark.

It is all about persuasion in getting you to believe one side of a story or the other.

The left wing socialist media outlets will go out of their way to control your mind and your destiny.


----------



## Bintang (4 March 2015)

noco said:


> Just believe in half of what your hear and  a quarter of what you read and you will be some where the mark.
> 
> It is all about persuasion in getting you to believe one side of a story or the other.
> 
> The left wing socialist media outlets will go out of their way to control your mind and your destiny.




Noco, from now on I will not believe more than 25% of anything that you post

Btw, what do the right wing conservative media outlets go out of their way to do?


----------



## noco (4 March 2015)

Bintang said:


> Noco, from now on I will not believe more than 25% of anything that you post
> 
> Btw, what do the right wing conservative media outlets go out of their way to do?




Read the center line of my post and that should answer your question.
*
It is all about persuasion in getting you to believe one side of a story or the other.*


----------



## Bintang (4 March 2015)

noco said:


> Read the center line of my post and that should answer your question.
> *
> It is all about persuasion in getting you to believe one side of a story or the other.*




I did read the centre line of your post but unlike the first and the last I couldn't think of anything flippant in response.


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2015)

The ABC didn't make a big issue of this story.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...ng-industry-forcing-older-workers-out/6305034

Probably because, they have said nothing about everyone else forced onto 12hr shifts over the last 20 years.


----------



## drsmith (12 March 2015)

12-hour shifts can be advantageous but it depends on the overall circumstances.

For example, if there's no overall increase in hours, nine 8-hour shifts per fortnight can become six 12-hour shifts over that same fortnight.


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2015)

drsmith said:


> 12-hour shifts can be advantageous but it depends on the overall circumstances.
> 
> For example, if there's no overall increase in hours, nine 8-hour shifts per fortnight can become six 12-hour shifts over that same fortnight.




Haven't seen many six days on, eight days off, doc. Or 3 days on four days off

Two weeks on one week off, at twelve hours per shift, is more the norm

Or four weeks on one week off.

But like I said I didn't see all the do gooders jumping up and down about it.lol

Two weeks on one week off = 14 shifts at 12 hours is 168 hours / 3 weeks works out to a 56 hour week. But you do travel in your own time.

Four on one off works out to about a 60 hour week.


----------



## Caveman (12 March 2015)

sptrawler said:


> The ABC didn't make a big issue of this story.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...ng-industry-forcing-older-workers-out/6305034
> 
> Probably because, they have said nothing about everyone else forced onto 12hr shifts over the last 20 years.




Ummm Isn`t it the ABC that are reporting it?


----------



## sptrawler (12 March 2015)

Caveman said:


> Ummm Isn`t it the ABC that are reporting it?




Yes they are giving it a cursory mention, but it has been a real issue for years, just doesn't pull a headline.
Unlike politics, which is front page news every day, whether it is important or not.


----------



## drsmith (12 March 2015)

The following video illustrates the context in which TA framed his "lifestyle choices" comment,



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzwTyZLswwI

The ABC though is keen to maintain the rage as an issue of race.

Today's edition of The World today,



> BRENDAN TREMBATH: There's more fallout from the Prime Minister Tony Abbott's comment that Indigenous Australians living in remote communities as "lifestyle choices" and can't expect to be subsidised by taxpayers.




http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2015/s4196106.htm


----------



## noco (12 March 2015)

drsmith said:


> The following video illustrates the context in which TA framed his "lifestyle choices" comment,
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Isn't this typical of the ABC to make something out of nothing in their endless effort to destroy Abbott at every opportunity...The ABC Labor propaganda machine is in full swing.

I have never heard them criticize the Andrews Victorian Government and asking the question, if Shorten and Gillard gave their blessings to the East West link, why doesn't Andrews honor the previous governments commitment.

This proves the ABC is politically biased towards the Labor Party...The government should sack the that fellow Scott who is on $800,000 PA.


----------



## Macquack (12 March 2015)

Fair dinkum Noco, if a meteorite hits the planet earth, you would blame the Australian Labor Party. End of story.


----------



## noco (12 March 2015)

Macquack said:


> Fair dinkum Noco, if a meteorite hits the planet earth, you would blame the Australian Labor Party. End of story.




Sorry Macquack, did I hit a nerve with the mention of  your comrades in the Labor Party controlled ABC...OOCH!!!!!


----------



## Bintang (12 March 2015)

Macquack said:


> Fair dinkum Noco, if a meteorite hits the planet earth, you would blame the Australian Labor Party. End of story.




Naa … Noco would never do that but I know what would happen.
*The ABC would blame Tony Abbott.*


----------



## Tisme (12 March 2015)

Macquack said:


> Fair dinkum Noco, if a meteorite hits the planet earth, you would blame the Australian Labor Party. End of story.




The vacuum of talent in Canberra  may well suck a rock  from it's galactic voyage through the universe.


----------



## sptrawler (13 March 2015)

Macquack said:


> Fair dinkum Noco, if a meteorite hits the planet earth, you would blame the Australian Labor Party. End of story.




How would that be different, from your blaming Abbott, for all of our  problems.


----------



## Bintang (15 March 2015)

noco said:


> Isn't this typical of the ABC to make something out of nothing in their endless effort to destroy Abbott at every opportunity...




Yes the ABC often has different perspectives on the political news. Take for example the recent story about Tony Abbott and the onion. Here are few headlines to compare:

The Mercury:
‪Prime Minister Tony Abbott surprises onlookers by eating raw onion ...

Sydney Morning Herald‎:
Tony Abbott shocks as he eats a raw onion whole

Washington Post:‎
An Onion headline: Australian leader eats raw onion whole

*ABC News*
*United Nations to investigate attempted gas attack on journalists by Tony Abbott*
_The Australian Labor party says that the reason Tony Abbott ate a raw onion was because he was planning a chemical warfare type gas attack on journalists working for the ABC._


----------



## dutchie (16 March 2015)

Still going on about the onion this morning. Your taxes at work.

Pathetic.


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2015)

I remember Martin St James hypnotising people into eating onions as if they were apples. I'm wondering if Credlin has an undisclosed talent? 



Bintang said:


> Yes the ABC often has different perspectives on the political news. Take for example the recent story about Tony Abbott and the onion. Here are few headlines to compare:
> 
> The Mercury:
> ‪Prime Minister Tony Abbott surprises onlookers by eating raw onion ...
> ...


----------



## Bintang (16 March 2015)

dutchie said:


> Still going on about the onion this morning. Your taxes at work.



Sticking with the story this morning the ABC sort out some broader reaction to Tony Abbott’s act of onion eating. 

Here is what they got:

*Adam Brandt* - Greens Party
_I am shocked by TA’s reckless disregard for the environment.  Do you know how much onion gas contributes to global warming? This is just TA once again thumbing his nose at climate change._

*Shayne Neumann* - Labor Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs
_I’m told it was a brown onion he ate. Why didn’t he eat a white onion? Indigenous Australians will be insulted by this symbolic act of racism by TA and he should apologise._

The ABC even managed  to get *Vladimir Putin* to briefly emerge from hiding to offer this comment:
_First this guy wants to shirt front me. Now he tries to prove he has more testosterone than me by eating a raw Tasmanian onion. What a joke. Why didn’t he wrestle a Tasmanian tiger instead._


----------



## noco (17 March 2015)

Senator Mitch Fifield on question time in Parliament today......So why have these pair of idiots done a back flip

Bill Shorten has now put Federal Labor in the ludicrous position of supporting Daniel Andrews and the Victorian Government in tearing up contracts for the East West Link, sending shivers down the spine of international investors.

This flies in the face of the sensible comments of his Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen at Press Club speech at the National Press Club in September last year where he said:

“Bill Shorten and I are of one mind, Labor honours contracts. Labor in Government honours contracts entered into by previous governments. Even if we don’t like them for issues of sovereign risk Labor honours contracts entered into by previous governments.”

SHARE if you think Bill Shorten is wrong.
'Bill Shorten today said he opposes the East West Link. Why is he opposing a road that will make life easier for Victorians and create jobs? SHARE if you think Bill Shorten is wrong.'

*Where is the ABC and the Fairfax newspapers? ...why aren't they tearing these two idiots apart.

If it had been Abbott and Hockey doing a back flip, the ABC would have been hammering it for a week.

David Lipson on Sky news would have been in his glory and not a word from him either....Perhaps the Green/Labor left wing socialists are starting to control Sky News as well.*


----------



## drsmith (22 March 2015)

More overreach on the people smuggling issue from the ABC ?



> Editor's note (20/3/15): This story has been updated to clarify that former immigration minister Scott Morrison did not make allegations Save The Children employees acted inappropriately.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...kers-lied-about-nauru-assaults-report/6336446


----------



## sptrawler (23 March 2015)

drsmith said:


> More overreach on the people smuggling issue from the ABC ?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...kers-lied-about-nauru-assaults-report/6336446




The media is out of control, they run the political agenda, the political bent and the polls.

Really, we should just chuck out the politicians and public servants and let the journo's run the country.

They have all the answers, know where everyone is stuffing up, criticise everything.

Well maybe we should just let them get on with running it.


----------



## noco (23 March 2015)

sptrawler said:


> The media is out of control, they run the political agenda, the political bent and the polls.
> 
> Really, we should just chuck out the politicians and public servants and let the journo's run the country.
> 
> ...




A lot of the media are under the control of the left wing Green/Labor party.....Labor has so much influence over the ABC, SBS, Fairfax, GETUP and all the ABC shows like QandA, Iniders, Media Watch. 

This all part of the Fabian Society operations.....Control the media and you control the peolpe.

The likes of Tony Jones are paid anything up to $10,000 to promote Global Warming or some nasties about Tony Abbott on his QandA show.....Emma A on Late Line is also a recipient


----------



## Tisme (23 March 2015)

noco said:


> A lot of the media are under the control of the left wing Green/Labor party.....Labor has so much influence over the ABC, SBS, Fairfax, GETUP and all the ABC shows like QandA, Iniders, Media Watch.
> 
> This all part of the Fabian Society operations.....Control the media and you control the peolpe.
> 
> The likes of Tony Jones are paid anything up to $10,000 to promote Global Warming or some nasties about Tony Abbott on his QandA show.....Emma A on Late Line is also a recipient




Been watching Andrew Bolt and his News Corp hand maiden on CH10 again Noco?


----------



## ghotib (23 March 2015)

noco said:


> The likes of Tony Jones are paid anything up to $10,000 to promote Global Warming or some nasties about Tony Abbott on his QandA show.....Emma A on Late Line is also a recipient



Noco,

You're entitled to be a one-eyed idiot but you're not entitled to make baseless accusations of corruption. If you have any shred of evidence that Tony Jones or Emma Alberici receive money for promoting particular views on QandA or LateLine you should take it to  the ABC or your local MHR. If you have no such evidence you should acknowledge that these statements are malicious garbage and withdraw them with apologies.


----------



## So_Cynical (23 March 2015)

noco said:


> A lot of the media are under the control of the left wing Green/Labor party.....Labor has so much influence over the ABC, SBS, Fairfax, GETUP and all the ABC shows like QandA, Iniders, Media Watch.
> 
> This all part of the Fabian Society operations.....Control the media and you control the peolpe.
> 
> The likes of Tony Jones are paid anything up to $10,000 to promote Global Warming or some nasties about Tony Abbott on his QandA show.....Emma A on Late Line is also a recipient




Have passed this on to Tony Jones and Emma A via their twitter feeds.

Hope they sue you for defamation.


----------



## noco (23 March 2015)

ghotib said:


> Noco,
> 
> You're entitled to be a one-eyed idiot but you're not entitled to make baseless accusations of corruption. If you have any shred of evidence that Tony Jones or Emma Alberici receive money for promoting particular views on QandA or LateLine you should take it to  the ABC or your local MHR. If you have no such evidence you should acknowledge that these statements are malicious garbage and withdraw them with apologies.




The information I quoted was from an interview between Andrew Bolt and Shari Markson...It was at the end of the Bolt report.....Please view it all to the end.

As far as them taking legal action against me...what rubbish.


http://tenplay.com.au/channel-ten/the-bolt-report/2015/3/22


----------



## dutchie (23 March 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Have passed this on to Tony Jones and Emma A via their twitter feeds.




Well done - absolute joke of the year.

It's so cynical that it's funny.


----------



## noco (23 March 2015)

dutchie said:


> Well done - absolute joke of the year.
> 
> It's so cynical that it's funny.




Well, some mothers do have them...They are born every day......There are many who don't get their brain into gear before they open their mouths.


----------



## ghotib (24 March 2015)

noco said:


> Well, some mothers do have them...They are born every day......There are many who don't get their brain into gear before they open their mouths.



Indeed, or put their fingers to the keyboard, and you are a prime example. Go back and look at that segment again. Neither Bolt nor Markson made the accusation you did and that you now attribute to them. You might argue that they hinted, implied and dog-whistled it, but they didn't say it and their little chat provides no evidence for it. 

They said that Jones and other ABC journalists are listed with speakers agencies and that the ABC should require them to disclose their fees for work outside the ABC and the organisations they've done gigs for. You claimed that Jones and Alberici are paid to promote certain views on ABC programmes. That's a very different and very ugly claim. You further claimed that you had quoted information from Bolt and Markson. You didn't. You paraphrased what you thought you heard. 

I repeat, you should withdraw your claim and apologise for it. 

Ghoti


----------



## noco (24 March 2015)

ghotib said:


> Indeed, or put their fingers to the keyboard, and you are a prime example. Go back and look at that segment again. Neither Bolt nor Markson made the accusation you did and that you now attribute to them. You might argue that they hinted, implied and dog-whistled it, but they didn't say it and their little chat provides no evidence for it.
> 
> They said that Jones and other ABC journalists are listed with speakers agencies and that the ABC should require them to disclose their fees for work outside the ABC and the organisations they've done gigs for. You claimed that Jones and Alberici are paid to promote certain views on ABC programmes. That's a very different and very ugly claim. You further claimed that you had quoted information from Bolt and Markson. You didn't. You paraphrased what you thought you heard.
> 
> ...




Shari Markson is a highly recognized and reliable journalist....You can twist things around as much as you like, but the smell is still there.


----------



## basilio (24 March 2015)

> *Indeed, or put their fingers to the keyboard, and you are a prime example. *Go back and look at that segment again. Neither Bolt nor Markson made the accusation you did and that you now attribute to them. You might argue that they hinted, implied and dog-whistled it, but they didn't say it and their little chat provides no evidence for it.
> 
> They said that Jones and other ABC journalists are listed with speakers agencies and that the ABC should require them to disclose their fees for work outside the ABC and the organisations they've done gigs for. You claimed that Jones and Alberici are paid to promote certain views on ABC programmes. That's a very different and very ugly claim. You further claimed that you had quoted information from Bolt and Markson. You didn't. You paraphrased what you thought you heard.
> 
> I repeat, you should withdraw your claim and apologise for it.  Ghoti




Your dead, ugly "off" on this issue Noco.  I get tired and completely fed up with the  general vacuous poisonous dribble you drip into his forum.  On this occasion time you have made a totally unfounded personal attack on ABC presenters with no evidence at all.

Put up proof or apologise


----------



## Ijustnewit (24 March 2015)

I really think todays ABC is being run by the Green view rather than Labor . The advert on the ABC Vote Compass which they run on News 24 says it all really. The last shot shows the " Where do you stand graph". It shows the graph sliding across to the Green vote at around 80% , talk about subliminal advertising.


----------



## noco (24 March 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> I really think todays ABC is being run by the Green view rather than Labor . The advert on the ABC Vote Compass which they run on News 24 says it all really. The last shot shows the " Where do you stand graph". It shows the graph sliding across to the Green vote at around 80% , talk about subliminal advertising.




Well, the Greens and Labor are in coalition and tarred with the same Fabian brush.

Basilo does not agree of course and he just cannot stand the truth on what the Fabians really stand for...


----------



## dutchie (24 March 2015)

basilio said:


> Put up proof or apologise




Or what? You'll tell on him again?

Wish you guys were as critical and demanding of the crap that comes out of the ABC.


----------



## basilio (24 March 2015)

dutchie said:


> Or what? You'll tell on him again?
> 
> Wish you guys were as critical and demanding of the crap that comes out of the ABC.




No one  has to tell on Noco - he does a great job of sprouting his own BS.

Noco just comes comes out with a lot of stale nonsense confabulating  the ALP with the  Fabians, the Commos, Land Rights for Gay Whales and any other tosh that passes his in box and can be regurgitated onto this Forum.

*The difference in the case of Tony Jones is that he made a specific libelous statement about a public person.* As usual there was not a shred of evidence offered. 

I am disappointed that he or anyone else its seems can make completely unsubstantiated libelous comments and get away with it. I suppose thats the Andrew Bolt Act in place.

Perhaps if I can't beat them I should join them ?  Heard about   xxxxxxx  their daughter and their pet dog ?


----------



## dutchie (24 March 2015)

basilio said:


> No one  has to tell on Noco - he does a great job of sprouting his own BS.
> 
> Noco just comes comes out with a lot of stale nonsense confabulating  the ALP with the  Fabians, the Commos, Land Rights for Gay Whales and any other tosh that passes his in box and can be regurgitated onto this Forum.
> 
> ...




You seem pretty upset with Noco.

I was just wondering basilio if you were just as upset with Julia Gillard when she claimed that Tony Abbott was a misogynist.

Did you email her and demand that she put up proof or apologise?

(Surely a Prime Minister making unsubstantiated libelous comments is much more serious than some unknown poster in a Stock Forum and she should not get away with it).


----------



## ghotib (24 March 2015)

noco said:


> Shari Markson is a highly recognized and reliable journalist....You can twist things around as much as you like, but the smell is still there.



Many babies find that smearing enhances the smell, but most of them grow out of it by the age of 3.

You have misquoted Sharri (note spelling) Markson and claimed that she made a baseless accusation that she herself carefully avoided. 

Time to grow up Noco.


----------



## basilio (24 March 2015)

dutchie said:


> You seem pretty upset with Noco.
> 
> I was just wondering basilio if you were just as upset with Julia Gillard when she claimed that Tony Abbott was a misogynist.
> 
> ...




You actually serious Dutchie ? Couple of small points

1) Parliament is actually a house of privilege.  Laws of libel/slander are exceptionally hard to enforce in such a place. (thats why Parliamentarians of any species can get way with saying almost anything) And anyway Tony Abbott is big enough, ugly enough and brutal enough to take care of himself.

2) Noco chose to make a *specific* *completely unfounded *allegation that goes to heart of a reputable reporters work.  He said that 







> The likes of Tony Jones are paid anything up to $10,000 to promote Global Warming or some nasties about Tony Abbott on his QandA show.....Emma A on Late Line is also a recipient



 It's an allegation that for an organisation like the ABC or in fact any other media outlook with integrity should result in an immediate investigation and possible dismissal if found correct. 

This is not another of his nebulous, crackpot  "all the ABC is Fabian"  rants. Ok we know that Noco just rabbits on with absolutely no regard for reality and accept that  is part of his persona. Nonetheless it is still a seriously libelous statement and I suggest shouldn't be part of this forum.  

________________________________________________________

Re Cash for comment.  I did say that the allegation against Tony Jones was very serious and would warrant an immediate investigation by the ABC if  any evidence was offered to prove it's truth. On the other hand of course in the real world of commercial media no such sanctions apply. (well nothing serious anyway...)

Alan Jones for example received hundreds of thousands of dollars from advertisers (The banks and others )  in  personal commissions to say nice things about them when the public was outraged at their gouging of customers. Got away with the lot scot free and laughing. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_comment_affair



2


----------



## noco (24 March 2015)

basilio said:


> You actually serious Dutchie ? Couple of small points
> 
> 1) Parliament is actually a house of privilege.  Laws of libel/slander are exceptionally hard to enforce in such a place. (thats why Parliamentarians of any species can get way with saying almost anything) And anyway Tony Abbott is big enough, ugly enough and brutal enough to take care of himself.
> 
> ...




Tony Jones most likely gets in a brown paper bag


----------



## Tisme (26 March 2015)

I'm wondering if the ABC is the origin of the "bias" storm in teacup that some fixate on:

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4185606.htm


----------



## dutchie (31 March 2015)

From the ABC's Drum:

Baird victory not necessarily good news for Abbott
Opinion
By Paula Matthewson 


Baird loss not necessarily good news for Abbott
Opinion
By Paula Matthewson 



_Take your pick!_


----------



## sptrawler (31 March 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm wondering if the ABC is the origin of the "bias" storm in teacup that some fixate on:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4185606.htm




I wonder if your not on a public service pension, lol, we both will die wondering.


----------



## Tink (31 March 2015)

It is so obvious the way they word things on the ABC.

I rarely watch Q & A anymore, but I did last night, and thought Christopher Pyne did well on there, the fixer, as he was called.
I was surprised seeing Tony Jones reminding Penny Wong of Labors failures with university.
Maybe I am just hoping they will be balanced.

It was still very Left stacked, and I do still think they should be privatised, or part privatised.

The next subject was bullying -- how appropriate, I could remind them of a few home truths.


----------



## dutchie (31 March 2015)

Tink said:


> It is so obvious the way they word things on the ABC.
> 
> I rarely watch Q & A anymore, but I did last night, and thought Christopher Pyne did well on there, the fixer, as he was called.
> I was surprised seeing Tony Jones reminding Penny Wong of Labors failures with university.
> ...




If it was not obvious that the Coalition know that the ABC is bias then one of Pyne's quips will set you straight...

At one stage a person in the audience made comments which criticised Labor and praised the Coalition.
Pyne commented "How did he get in here"  (or words to that affect) (and he was not joking)

Funniest part of the show. (Ruby wasn't)


----------



## Tink (31 March 2015)

Yes, I saw that dutchie, and laughed also.

I missed the first part of the show and started watching when Pyne was talking about ice, and how they had dealt with drugs in the past.

I agree with noco, when he says it's a Labor/Greens propaganda machine.
He is spot on, and we have all seen the biased.

As I have said, they did not help our election at all, and should be privatised pushing their own agenda.

Why did they never state that Daniel Andrews, Vic Labor, had intentions of selling the Port of Melbourne.

Why didn't they state that Daniel Andrews removed all the drug testing on construction sites for his mates as soon as he came in, and it was only because of the Coalition demanding that we had a problem with ice, that they should reinstate it, and so they did.

It is taxpayer funded and should be reporting both, not just what they want.


----------



## Bintang (31 March 2015)

dutchie said:


> If it was not obvious that the Coalition know that the ABC is bias then one of Pyne's quips will set you straight...
> 
> At one stage a person in the audience made comments which criticised Labor and praised the Coalition.
> Pyne commented "How did he get in here"  (or words to that affect) (and he was not joking)
> ...




Yes, very funny but as a politician he should also know the answer to his own question.
The guy simply did what every politician does 'to get in'.

He Lied!


----------



## Tink (1 April 2015)

So, in view of the ABC constantly putting the boot into the Catholics in a most unbalanced and unfair manner, only the Christians of course, this organisation now encourages arsonists?

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...church_to_the_cheers_of_an_actress_on_the_abc

Do they realise that their sense of “elation” is the same as that of the Daesh militants, when they destroy Buddhas and relics of ancient history?

Disgraceful.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-30/heritage-listed-st-james-church-fire-brighton/6357430


----------



## Tink (12 April 2015)

Well said, Andrew

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/the-abc-of-our-islamophobia/story-fni0ffxg-1227296169651


----------



## noco (18 April 2015)

What a joke this ABC is!!!!

More solid evidence of Labor bias over the Victorian Labor Government ....The ABC is now blaming Abbott for locking up $3 billion which has been ear marked for the East West freeway.

Why are they not hammering Bill Shorten for his back flip after recommending the East West freeway was a good idea but now it is not such a good idea....The communist dominated unions are in control over Shorten and the Victorian Government.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ts/abc_bored_with_640_million_of_labor_waste/


----------



## noco (19 April 2015)

The ABC is totally out of control and should be brought into line to honor the ABC charter of impartiality.

The ABC is run by the Green/Labor left wing socialist and I do not see the Communications Minister, Malcolm Turbull, doing anything to stop it.....Surely he has some control over the ABC in his portfolio  or perhaps it suits him to allow the ABC to run riot against the Liberal Party Federal and state to suit his own endeavors for the leadership of the Liberal Party.

I have written to my local MP complaining about the lewd acts the ABC are presenting through the ABC channels, Insiders, QandA, Media Watch, the Drum, the 7.30 report and the 10.30 late line. 



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/abc_frames_colin_barnett/


----------



## Tink (20 April 2015)

Thanks for posting that, noco.
Yes, it is a joke.

I could not believe they did not say anything to Daniel Andrews, regarding the East West Link, and all the money he has wasted. He did say we were not going to pay any compensation.

A road we very much needed, and driving around, I have noticed a lot of stickers on the back of peoples cars saying -- East West Link - just build it.

Yes, you can tell who the ABC are pushing for, as I said, nothing was said prior to the election.

Also the Cancer private hospital wing.
Nothing was said, but people are very disappointed.


----------



## dutchie (21 April 2015)

Dave Hughes - People in glass houses............


----------



## Logique (18 May 2015)

People are just picking on Alberici and Sales because they're women, apparently.

Nothing to do with them interrupting every 10 seconds the Treasurer and Finance Minister in the so called interviews, which were little more than sustained heckling sessions.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tough-abcs-emma-alberici-20150518-gh4a3f.html


----------



## banco (18 May 2015)

Logique said:


> People are just picking on Alberici and Sales because they're women, apparently.
> 
> Nothing to do with them interrupting every 10 seconds the Treasurer and Finance Minister in the so called interviews, which were little more than sustained heckling sessions.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tough-abcs-emma-alberici-20150518-gh4a3f.html




Given that politicians try to dodge the question you have to go hard.  If they don't like it they should stop lying.


----------



## noco (18 May 2015)

banco said:


> Given that politicians try to dodge the question you have to go hard.  If they don't like it they should stop lying.




Shorten is the biggest offender...He was asked 13 times in one interview where is the money coming from for his hare brain schemes and avoided the question  every time.


----------



## MrBurns (19 May 2015)

I think interviewers should just shut the interview down when they do that.
Just say thanks for your time but our viewers aren't stupid and would prefer questions were answered
Good day.


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2015)

I think the ABC is the least of the govt's problems.

This is the bloke who bet he could fellatio himself on air, but somehow still survives to poison young people's minds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dds6Kv-FKSY


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I think interviewers should just shut the interview down when they do that.
> Just say thanks for your time but our viewers aren't stupid and would prefer questions were answered
> Good day.





Politicians should do their homework. I can bet London to a brick many here with political loyalties found it very amusing when their arch enemies were asked to, for example state the base interest rate, the base GST, etc. Very funny and satisfying when on the winning side. Lucky for me I don't have sides so I get to have a chuckle both ways


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2015)

noco said:


> The ABC is run by the Green/Labor left wing socialist and I do not see the Communications Minister, Malcolm Turbull, doing anything to stop it.....




That's because Malcolm displays the maturity of free expression, the others cannot abide. You yourself are afforded the courtesy of expressing your bile and vitriol towards the ALP without the mods resorting to a Goebbels solution so why not others. I for one don't dislike you for you extremisms.


----------



## sptrawler (31 May 2015)

Jeez, I read this this on the drum, I couldn't believe my eyes.

Someone at the drum, will have to answer for publishing it.IMO

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-29/sharman-are-there-no-jobs-or-are-our-kids-just-slack/6505914

Hell, Sydboy,IFocus, Sir Rumpole and Tisme, will have something to say about this lunatic.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 May 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez, I read this this on the drum, I couldn't believe my eyes.
> 
> Someone at the drum, will have to answer for publishing it.IMO
> 
> ...




I don't have a problem with that article. 

It's better to have an enquiry about things like this and get the facts into the open than to labour (no pun intended) under delusions.

Maybe we could say the same about iron ore prices.


----------



## IFocus (1 June 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez, I read this this on the drum, I couldn't believe my eyes.
> 
> Someone at the drum, will have to answer for publishing it.IMO
> 
> ...




Hate to be persona, but i think your comments naive where is the future in permanent part time work with no skills training which is the American way?


----------



## noco (1 June 2015)

I watched the senate inquiry into the ABC last week and I could not believe that left wing Mark Scott came out with, *"WE ARE NOT BIASED TOWARDS THE GREEN/LABOR PARTY".*..Who is he trying to fool?


----------



## Tisme (1 June 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez, I read this this on the drum, I couldn't believe my eyes.
> 
> Someone at the drum, will have to answer for publishing it.IMO
> 
> ...





When young people front up to me for a job and are covered head to toe in ink, with studs in their tongues, lips, noses and brows, I just disregard all that and ask them if they have a great work ethic. 

I've moved to employing middle aged people who seem to have the stamina, job pride and punctuality required to put in a real working day.


----------



## Tisme (1 June 2015)

noco said:


> I watched the senate inquiry into the ABC last week and I could not believe that left wing Mark Scott came out with, *"WE ARE NOT BIASED TOWARDS THE GREEN/LABOR PARTY".*..Who is he trying to fool?




I find that hard to believe of you Noco, you knock the ABC every other day for being a cesspit of Labor and Green scum. What are you watching that drivel for anyway?


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2015)

IFocus said:


> Hate to be persona, but i think your comments naive where is the future in permanent part time work with no skills training which is the American way?




I guess with the economy in a transition, permanent part time work, is better than permanent unemployed.imo


----------



## dutchie (2 June 2015)

Trioli was reading out tributes to Joan Kirner. Guess who's tribute was not good enough.

Can't even keep her mouth (bias) shut on a bipartisan event. Pathetic.


----------



## noco (2 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> I find that hard to believe of you Noco, you knock the ABC every other day for being a cesspit of Labor and Green scum. What are you watching that drivel for anyway?




Tisme, one day you will wake up and learn how the Fabian society works in a very subtle way.

The Fabian society as you and your comrades well know is closely associated with communism......

Their ideology is central control.

Control firstly of the media, government control of mining, manufacturing, agriculture and the banks....even the way you live your life.

Now it should be evident to you why they now have control of the ABC......continually criticize and discredit a conservative government and its leader where possible.....To exaggerate and pick up any slip of the tongue made by the leader.....continually use propaganda like "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer..Do it often enough and the naive  believe it...you will never make the poor richer by making the rich poorer (Abraham Lincoln)

Skin the economy of a country with higher wages, longer service leave, leave loading, penalty rates and the unions have done it for the Fabians by striking for what they demand....it has all added to cost....Is it any wonder we now manufacture very little in Australia....Now the unions are disrupting building projects with intimidation and distortion.

Communism has failed in the past and will fail again.


----------



## Tisme (2 June 2015)

noco said:


> The Fabian society as you and your comrades well know is closely associated with communism......
> 
> 
> .




 Mate you really gotta get a couple of bucks out of your pocket and buy a clue.  Do you actually realise how enslaved and you are by your hate and conspiracy monotony? 

You have to kidding if you think I would actually be offended at being called out as a communist/fabian/red/etc. ....like I care what you call me (e.g. liberal, labour, green). 

Your whole life seems to be parcelled up into antagonist and protagonist groups and factions, with no room for independent individual thought...which is kind of sad really because there must have been a time as a young kid when you really didn't care what your friends persuasions were, just that they were fun to be with, rather than exclusive brethren.


----------



## noco (2 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> Mate you really gotta get a couple of bucks out of your pocket and buy a clue.  Do you actually realise how enslaved and you are by your hate and conspiracy monotony?
> 
> You have to kidding if you think I would actually be offended at being called out as a communist/fabian/red/etc. ....like I care what you call me (e.g. liberal, labour, green).
> 
> Your whole life seems to be parcelled up into antagonist and protagonist groups and factions, with no room for independent individual thought...which is kind of sad really because there must have been a time as a young kid when you really didn't care what your friends persuasions were, just that they were fun to be with, rather than exclusive brethren.




Tisme, I care about our country and the way it is heading...I received my OBE some years ago and I have lived through a lot of political changes in that time....Many of them I was deeply concerned with....Being an elder on this forum I have endeavored to high light the dangers in which some political parties are trying to lead us into...Some members on the ASF do take offense to some of my postings and I can understand that with different political views and some become very agitated because they do not concur with my opinion.

Maybe I was out of line in branding you as a comrade which can be taken in different ways.....If you have taken offense, then I apologize.

I have posted this link before and I am going to post it again....It was compiled during Julia Gillard's term as Prime Minister.


http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard/

*There is no real difference between Fabianism and Leninist Communism. Both their goals are to impose collectivism. Communism sought to impose collectivism using overwhelming force. We have seen how that failed.

The Fabianists believe in achieving their aims by stealth. They were opposed to the violent revolutions in Russia and China. Instead, they prefer to infiltrate into positions of power and then go about implementing their socialist agenda step by step. They operate so stealthily and operate so slowly, chipping away at the very fabric of society little by little, that most people don’t even notice they have lost their freedom until it is too late. At the same time, the Fabianists are extremely skilled at manipulating public opinion using emotive causes that sound so attractive that most people miss the sinister purpose behind them.*

Julia Gillard
Julia Gillard, PM of Australia, and self-confessed Communist that morphed into the Fabian Society

Julia Gillard, PM of Australia, and self-confessed Communist that morphed into the Fabian Society

*Julia Gillard and her comrades have done everything precisely by the Fabian book. They have got into the corridors of power using honeyed words and big promises, as well as knifing their only obstacle in the back.Once in power they have ruthlessly, but quietly, gone about imposing their socialist aims on a population powerless to act against them. We have been disarmed. We have no way to determine how we are governed. The Fabianists dictate what laws we are ruled by. We are spied on (cameras everywhere today). The press, that pillar of our social fabric, has let us down and succumbed to the bullying politicians. Instead of standing up for the rights of the common man, they have surrendered their power to those in power. They have left We the People totally exposed to the depredations of the wolves in sheep’s clothing.
*
We are sheep ready for the Fabian wolves to destroy. And they are gradually destroying the very fabric of our society by imposing unneeded taxes on the very industries that could be taking us to a brighter future.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> Mate you really gotta get a couple of bucks out of your pocket and buy a clue.




Going to take more than a couple of bucks.


----------



## noco (2 June 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Going to take more than a couple of bucks.




So are you insinuating that what I have posted is incorrect?

Or is it a fact that you cannot accept the truth about the Green/Labor socialists?


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2015)

Punch and Judy round I'm not sure what,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...-bullying-claim-in-the-killing-season/6513070

Has (or will) Bill Shorten be interviewed as part of this series ?


----------



## noco (3 June 2015)

drsmith said:


> Punch and Judy round I'm not sure what,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...-bullying-claim-in-the-killing-season/6513070
> 
> Has (or will) Bill Shorten be interviewed as part of this series ?





Doc, it is a pity the ABC doesn't interview Shorten with his dodgy dealings with the AWU.....Get a leak from the Abbott government cabinet and the ABC is all over it and they will flog it all week.

The Fabians are in control of the media.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...380475371?sv=648f81a8b179e35c4d3ffb0d72fd5aa7


----------



## trainspotter (3 June 2015)

latest tweet from Malcolm Turnbull ...... 

http://www.communications.gov.au/television/abc_and_sbs_board_appointments



> Current regulation requires that a merit-based selection process is used to appoint non-executive directors to the boards of the ABC and SBS, including their Chairs.
> 
> An independent Nomination Panel (the panel) advertises vacancies and assesses applications against merit-based selection criteria. The panel provides the Government with a report nominating at least three people for each vacancy. The Government then makes a recommendation to the Governor-General who is responsible for appointing non-executive directors to the ABC and SBS Boards (other than the Managing Directors and the ABC staff-elected director).


----------



## Tisme (3 June 2015)

drsmith said:


> Punch and Judy round I'm not sure what,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...-bullying-claim-in-the-killing-season/6513070
> 
> ...




I think there would be a queue around the block of public servants who were bullied to do a fair day's work for an inflated days pay (plus outrageous super). Kevin was/is unrelenting when it comes to tasking the staff to do a diligent job.

It should be entertaining watching newter bulls versus failed milker cows.


----------



## Tisme (3 June 2015)

noco said:


> Tisme, I care about our country and the way it is heading...I received my OBE some years ago and I have lived through a lot of political changes in that time....Many of them I was deeply concerned with....Being an elder on this forum I have endeavored to high light the dangers in which some political parties are trying to lead us into...Some members on the ASF do take offense to some of my postings and I can understand that with different political views and some become very agitated because they do not concur with my opinion.
> 
> Maybe I was out of line in branding you as a comrade which can be taken in different ways.....If you have taken offense, then I apologize.
> 
> ...




Noco there is no doubt you are passionate for your cause, but you come across as a two dimensional character and in so doing lose your audience. 

Regardless of fabians, fascists, plutocrats, et al the voting population seems to divide it governing preferences equally and we can thank compulsory voting for that. I doubt more than 10% of the voters actually know what the difference between parties is. Simpletons just regard the Labor Party as grubby unions hacks and the Liberal Party as arrogant born to rule seekers. Both parties perpetuate those myths.

You might worry about Fabians, but my concern is the monkey grip the Catholic Church has on our politicians and thus a master who governs their conscience in contrast to the constitutional Crown


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> I think there would be a queue around the block of public servants who were bullied to do a fair day's work for an inflated days pay (plus outrageous super). Kevin was/is unrelenting when it comes to tasking the staff to do a diligent job.



Don't kneel too long at that alter.

You'll only get sore knees and ashes in your face.


----------



## Logique (3 June 2015)

I've been happy to criticize the ABC.

But credit where it's due, Leigh Sales hopped into Tony Burke, ALP shadow minister tonight on the 7:30 Report. He took it in good part, a tick for both of them on this.


----------



## noco (8 June 2015)

Wow!!!!!!... what a change of attitude to learn the ABC has become biased towards the Liberal Coalition and the Labor don't like it one bit.

Maybe the ABC has finally got the message.......SHAPE UP OR SHIP OUT.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...387359628?sv=3817f64fc095751638b3a9e4491cc99c

*The ABC’s blatant bias against the Labor Party has become a *national disgrace.

Sarah Ferguson’s imminent *series on the Kevin Rudd-Julia Gillard years — The Killing Season — is a deplorable, reprehensible attempt by the ABC to needlessly dredge up events Labor would best have us forget.

It deals with occurrences Labor needs to put behind it and the only reason the ABC has taken such pains to make the series is its outrageous and increasingly obvious preference for the Coalition.*


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2015)

I hope they have interviewed Bill Shorten.

What sort of a killing season would it have been without him ?


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2015)

drsmith said:


> I hope they have interviewed Bill Shorten.
> 
> What sort of a killing season would it have been without him ?




It would be  very short killing season indeed !


----------



## overhang (11 June 2015)

I was curious to see how media outlets would report on the South Australian power stations and coalmine closing down today and I noticed a couple of interesting things.  The ABC have quite a long article but have omitted this statement from the CEO of Alinta Energy Jeff Dimery while quoting him in other areas.


> “The decline in demand for energy, as households have become more efficient and the number of industrial customers has declined, combined with policy settings designed to support significant growth in renewable energy generation, have together had the effect of causing a significant oversupply of power available to South Australia.”



Now the article in The Australian has included the statement as has The Guardians article.  The interesting thing is when I checked this out a couple of hours ago SBS also included the statement but I've notcied now that the statement has disappeared from their article and the article says it was updated about an hour ago.

The ABC have selectively left out that policy such as the RET have contributed to the closing down of these power stations.
For reference here are the articles
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/11/south-australia-power-stations-and-coal-mine-to-close-with-loss-of-440-jobs
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-11/power-stations-port-augusta-alinta-energy/6537814
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/06/11/sa-jobs-lost-mine-power-stations-close
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/alinta-jobs-port-augusta-power-stations-leigh-creek-coal-mine-to-be-closed/story-e6frg9df-1227392730116


----------



## dutchie (23 June 2015)

Stupid ABC for giving Zaky Mallah a platform (Q and A).

More stupid the people who clapped him.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Stupid ABC for giving Zaky Mallah a platform (Q and A).
> 
> More stupid the people who clapped him.




No doubt the gung ho rednecks will attack the ABC about that d***head's appearance on Q&A last night, but personally I think that it's preferable that people like this be bought out into the open so we can see who they are, rather than have them skulking in the shadows. That guys appearance only bought discredit on himself, not the ABC.

Now Dr Goebels aka Malcolm Turnbull goes on the warpath announcing an enquiry into Q&A. He's just making a fool of himself by trying to bully the ABC into being a government mouthpiece. Leave it alone Malcolm, you are better than that.


----------



## dutchie (23 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> He's just making a fool of himself by trying to bully the ABC into being a government mouthpiece.




You just don't get it. It's not that Malcolm or I or many on this thread want the ABC to be a mouthpiece of the government but it's just that we want it to stop being a mouthpiece of Labor. We want it to fulfill it's Charter and be a mouthpiece of neither. We want it to be unbiased.

That's not too much to ask, as we pay for the ABC.



It was obvious last night that Labor supporters are so keen to put down the Coalition that they are willing to lower themselves to clap a terrorist, shame on them.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> You just don't get it. It's not that Malcolm or I or many on this thread want the ABC to be a mouthpiece of the government but it's just that we want it to stop being a mouthpiece of Labor. We want it to fulfill it's Charter and be a mouthpiece of neither. We want it to be unbiased.
> 
> That's not too much to ask, as we pay for the ABC.
> 
> ...




That's a totally unjustified assertion that the people who clapped WERE LABOR PARTY supporters. How the hell do you know that ? They were probably a few ratbags from the jihad supporters club that that idiot dragged along with him.

As for Q&A being a Labor mouthpiece, Ciobo had a fair say, and what he said was fair enough. That's what you don't get, people from BOTH sides are on that show, so it's as much a mouthpiece for the Coalition as it is for Labor.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> That's a totally unjustified assertion that the people who clapped WERE LABOR PARTY supporters. How the hell do you know that ? They were probably a few ratbags from the jihad supporters club that that idiot dragged along with him.
> 
> As for Q&A being a Labor mouthpiece, Ciobo had a fair say, and what he said was fair enough. That's what you don't get, people from BOTH sides are on that show, so it's as much a mouthpiece for the Coalition as it is for Labor.




I would disagree.

The "show" is heavily weighted to the Left. People declare they are on the Right just to get a ticket!

It routinely bollocks the middle ground and the right. 

Best it were removed. 

gg


----------



## noco (23 June 2015)

Shame on the ABC...Malcolm Turnbull should take stronger action and pulled them into line or they may suffer the consequences. 



http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...view-of-the-show/story-fnihmoiz-1227411028293


----------



## jank (23 June 2015)

I am not a natural born Australia so I come at this with 'fresher' eyes but if anyone thinks the Q&A or the ABC in general does not lean left then they need to examine their own perspective.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 June 2015)

jank said:


> I am not a natural born Australia so I come at this with 'fresher' eyes but if anyone thinks the Q&A or the ABC in general does not lean left then they need to examine their own perspective.




So what if they do ? It just balances the commercial media leaning to the right.


----------



## Tisme (23 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So what if they do ? It just balances the commercial media leaning to the right.




The ABC being leftie because of last night is a nonsense. The imbecile Liberal couldn't contain his emotions and baited the other imbecilic young fella. The wise heads on the panel didn't weigh in, but not our assistant to foreign affairs, he just kept it u.

The thing that we should be alarmed at is the implication of having censorship because it doesn't make the government happy. Last night's furore had nothing to do with politics, but as usual  Abbott makes it his cause and indignation along party lines .....poor form in my books.


----------



## drsmith (23 June 2015)

The ABC in it's own news coverage has provided a video of the exchange that involved the ABC's question asking guest,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...d-former-terror-suspect-qa-appearance/6565886

It's well worth listening to as Malcolm Turnbull's slap down in parliament today which is also linked in the above article.


----------



## nioka (23 June 2015)

Is the ABC really left wing OR is it just that the "right" wing want it to be further to the right. If it leans a little to the left maybe it is because it is subject to funds cutting by the right. Who is right or wrong may depend on who is left or right. I'm not sure which way it slants except to say I am an ABC watcher. (I hate adds)


----------



## noco (24 June 2015)

nioka said:


> Is the ABC really left wing OR is it just that the "right" wing want it to be further to the right. If it leans a little to the left maybe it is because it is subject to funds cutting by the right. Who is right or wrong may depend on who is left or right. I'm not sure which way it slants except to say I am an ABC watcher. (I hate adds)





The ABC has gone too far this time and it time for some action on those at the top including Tony Jones.

I have been trying to get through to many people, the ABC has been taken over by the Fabian Society which in turn controls the Green/Labor socialist left.....They attempt to discredit any conservative government and criticize their leaders....They believe in central control and their starting point is the media....control the media and you control the people.....They are doing it in a very subtle way and chip away at every opportunity without you realizing what is going on..

The Fabians control the Green/Labor socialist and it is a well known fact they will rack up huge debts in both state and Federal governments and then leave it to a conservative government to pay it back and in doing so cause hardships on the Australia public......This results in the conservative governments being  branded as unfair  and this where the control of the media takes its place....They will promote their propaganda in such a way and often enough through the likes of QandA, Media watch, GETUP, Insiders, the 7.30 report and the ABC late line... 
NB. Bill Shorten is a foundation member of GETUP and a recent board member.....Getup just received $1 million donation from from the unions.

Having brain washed their audience through and through, and if ever they get back into power, they will move to central control of the banks, mining, manufacturing and agriculture....This is commonly known as communism but the Fabians would prefer to be known as Democratic Socialists.

BTW....I will be  ready for an ear full from the lefties.......NO...NO..NO....NOCO you have got it all wrong there are no REDS under the bed.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...410582895?sv=f7cb2d8291202c6ba5e69996021008db


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2015)

noco said:


> BTW....I will be  ready for an ear full from the lefties.......NO...NO..NO....NOCO you have got it all wrong there are no REDS under the bed.





You really have to stop using the Rupert Murdoch press and cronies as proofs to your arguments Noco ... it's  never going to be taken seriously by those who haven't been brain washed over the years.

I also think we all know the "reds under the bed" routine was wedge politics that Menzies employed to defame the Labor Party, even though the Labor Party was against communism  too.  I think you'd find many of those looney left ideals from that time are now accepted norms, even in our jackboot controlled parliaments.

I have no love for the Labor Party, the LNP, the Greens, nor secret squirrel organisations and I still say the whole Qanda beatup is just that. I think it's about time Australians saw one of these potential terrorists up front and personal so they can gauge the menace. 

It's not like it's a show for other than thinking people, it's like a University conflab, which is encouraged in higher education learning. That is why Liberals don't like it, because it scares them to consider other people might have an opinion that differs from theirs and most of the time "those" people can outgun them with fact or logic over fiction or fairies.

We don't need Mc Carthyism in this country, but it seems we are going to get it thanks to a shrinking violet Labor leader and divide and conquer half wit leading the other team.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2015)

nioka said:


> Is the ABC really left wing OR is it just that the "right" wing want it to be further to the right. If it leans a little to the left maybe it is because it is subject to funds cutting by the right. Who is right or wrong may depend on who is left or right. I'm not sure which way it slants except to say I am an ABC watcher. (I hate adds)




As I've said before, people's perceptions of bias are based on their own biases. A Far Right Winger like Tony Abbott sees a middle of the road view as being "lefty".  Some people seem to think that the ABC should be an instrument of government propaganda, as long as they are the ones in government. When they are in Opposition, the ABC should be "unbiased". Hypocrisy abounds in politics.


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2015)

What does acquitted on a technicality mean? Either Mr Mallah was judged guilty or not. 

Because the ultimate word on who gets his citizenship stripped is the court's, surely this is a case of horse before the cart and the cart doesn't like the outcome? Why would Ciobo publically imply the court system was wrong? I'm wondering who has the worst case of playground maturity, the pollie or the jihadist.


----------



## overhang (24 June 2015)

noco said:


> Shame on the ABC...Malcolm Turnbull should take stronger action and pulled them into line or they may suffer the consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...view-of-the-show/story-fnihmoiz-1227411028293






noco said:


> Shame on the ABC...Malcolm Turnbull should take stronger action and pulled them into line or they may suffer the consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...view-of-the-show/story-fnihmoiz-1227411028293




Shame on the Courier Mail, disgrace of a tabloid. This is their front cover today http://imgur.com/CXbyX1y 
To insinuate that our public broadcaster is supporting one of the most oppressive terrorist groups we have ever seen is straight out shameful.    

This whole thing has been blown out of proportion from the right who ironically were the ones that gave this man too much publicity at the time he was charged.  Now the ABC were wrong to put this man on live television given that the judge said 







> 37 Furthermore, placing a person such as the Prisoner into the public spotlight is not only likely to encourage him to embark on even more outrageous and extravagant behaviour but, perhaps more importantly, it risks unnecessarily heightening the existing public concerns about terrorist activity as well as encouraging or fanning divisive and discriminatory views among some members of the community.



 but note this was about the right wing media at the time giving this man a platform. 

I thought the right were all about free speech.


----------



## dutchie (24 June 2015)




----------



## chiff (24 June 2015)

Are you talking about the same GETUP that I know Noco?
They sell Viagra


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2015)

chiff said:


> Are you talking about the same GETUP that I know Noco?
> They sell Viagra




I don't think we want to know about your difficulties in bed.


----------



## jank (24 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So what if they do ? It just balances the commercial media leaning to the right.




That then raises another question. Will the ABC admit to being biased and should a taxpayer funded organisation be biased and take a side. Commercial media is different as the tax payer does not contribute to it and they as a consumer can decide to purchase or consume said media. As a tax payer you have no choice, therefore it should be impartial and non biased.

State media is not there to be a counter weight to the prevailing story of the day.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2015)

jank said:


> State media is not there to be a counter weight to the prevailing story of the day.




It's there to publish stories and points of view that don't get published elsewhere.


----------



## So_Cynical (24 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It's there to publish stories and points of view that don't get published elsewhere.




Yeah, the ABC, SBS and Crikey are basically the only centre left media organisations..everything else including all the commercial TV networks, newspapers and talk radio is right wing.

Have just watched the Q & A in question and don't see a problem.


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2015)

One good thing is that we all know who this fella is and what he looks like. The community can keep an eye on him now.


----------



## noco (24 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> You really have to stop using the Rupert Murdoch press and cronies as proofs to your arguments Noco ... it's  never going to be taken seriously by those who haven't been brain washed over the years.
> 
> I also think we all know the "reds under the bed" routine was wedge politics that Menzies employed to defame the Labor Party, even though the Labor Party was against communism  too.  I think you'd find many of those looney left ideals from that time are now accepted norms, even in our jackboot controlled parliaments.
> 
> ...




Firstly, neither you or anyone else will stop me from expressing my opinion even though you don't agree with me nor do you need to tell me to stop using Rupert Murdoch press and his cronies....Murdoch has nothing to do with my opinion of how the ABC operates...The Green/Labor socialist party control the ABC for their own advantage and perhaps one day you and many naive people will come to realize when it is too late.

Secondly,I have taken in  my own observation over the years to form my own opinion as to how the Labor Party has converted to collectivism....The Labor Party and the unions  are a different party today as to when it was in the late 1890s.


----------



## Duckman#72 (24 June 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Yeah, the ABC, SBS and Crikey are basically the only centre left media organisations..everything else including all the commercial TV networks, newspapers and talk radio is right wing.
> 
> Have just watched the Q & A in question and don't see a problem.




What about "The Age" and "The Sydney Morning Herald"? And I'd hardly call Channel 10 "right wing". Yes they might put Bolt on in the deadslots of Sunday morning and afternoon, but Waleed Aly gets primetime weeknights!

Duckman


----------



## noco (24 June 2015)

Here is another example of media control orchestrated by the ABC......It is a known fact, the balance of the audience is not made up of what Tony Jones makes out it is......the percentage of Liberals to the Labor party and the Greens is fictitious and shows up when there is  anything anti government gets an over whelming support by the audience.   


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...nder-of-judgment/story-e6frg71x-1227411737212
*
Mallah’s inclusion on Q&A was a betrayal of moderate Muslims who would have been appalled by his comments and, understandably, dread being tainted with the same brush. Q&A, as usual, claimed its studio audience was balanced, made up of 34 per cent Labor voters, 36 per cent Coalition voters, Greens 13 per cent, others 1 per cent and unspecified 15 per cent. But as regular watchers of the program have noted week in and week out, it was the most outrageous left-wing statements, as usual, that drew the loudest applause. Had the audience breakdown been as claimed, Mallah would never have received the cheers he did, suggesting the breakdowns are a fraud. As many of the audience applauded Mallah, perhaps it didn’t occur to them how Islamic State or any fundamentalist Islamic regime would treat one of the show’s panellists, transgender singer Antony Hegarty.*


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2015)

noco said:


> Here is another example of media control orchestrated by the ABC......It is a known fact, the balance of the audience is not made up of what Tony Jones makes out it is......the percentage of Liberals to the Labor party and the Greens is fictitious and shows up when there is  anything anti government gets an over whelming support by the audience.
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...nder-of-judgment/story-e6frg71x-1227411737212
> ...




So what are you saying Noco? That lefties ergo Labor voters are terrorists because there were some Labor types in the QANDA audience? How long is that bow of yours?


----------



## noco (24 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> So what are you saying Noco? That lefties ergo Labor voters are terrorists because there were some Labor types in the QANDA audience? How long is that bow of yours?




How absurd that you should make such a comment...That that does not add credence to your argument...It is you who is trying to put words in my mouth.

What was the ABC's motive and what did they hope to gain out of it all?...Perhaps you might like to answer that question?....I sure would like a sensible response from you this time.                            


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vi...is-grips-network/story-fni0fit3-1227411833593

*QUESTIONS ... BUT NO ANSWERS FROM THE ABC

1. How did Zaky Mallah end up in the audience?

2. Were the program’s producers aware of his background?

3. What process did they go through to approve his involvement?

4. How did Q&A decide that he could ask a question?

5. Did they know what his question would be?

6. What was the reasoning for letting him ask a question?

7. Will Tony Jones and Q&A apologise to Steve Ciobo and/or the audience for what unfolded?

8. What changes will be made to prevent this from happening again?

9. Will the show’s staff be disciplined for the “error in judgment” in allowing Zaky Mallah to be on the program?

10. Will this controversy jeopardise the program’s future?

ellen.whinnett@news.com.au*


----------



## DB008 (24 June 2015)

What next, ISIS/ISIL head honcho interviewed next week on Q&A?


----------



## MrBurns (25 June 2015)

I think the ABC has improved in recent months I've seen several interviews where ALP pollies were taken on by their presenters. Q&A is stacked to some extent mainly because the left treat it as their own platform. 
I do agree it was good to see this nut case brought into the open, just how stupid is this country that after the siege in Sydney that this maggot be set free among us.
We are just asking to be attacked and we will be eventually.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> How absurd that you should make such a comment...That that does not add credence to your argument...It is you who is trying to put words in my mouth.
> 
> What was the ABC's motive and what did they hope to gain out of it all?...Perhaps you might like to answer that question?....I sure would like a sensible response from you this time.
> 
> ...




....


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> How absurd that you should make such a comment...That that does not add credence to your argument...It is you who is trying to put words in my mouth.
> 
> What was the ABC's motive and what did they hope to gain out of it all?...Perhaps you might like to answer that question?....I sure would like a sensible response from you this time.
> 
> ...




You are squibbing on the answer. I want to know how Labor and lefties are to blame for some individual who was found not to have a case to answer by the rule of law way back in the day, way before the cafÃ© seige? Why is QANDA the whipping boy of the LNP and its obsequious followers and why does the LNP try to deny our rights to hear the words of someone we may find obnoxious, but content to allow one of their own to behave like a spoiled brat for all to see?

Apparently this bloke in question went off to fight against ISIS with a US backed and trained Syrian counter organisation, has previously and currently publicly denounced ISIS as hijacking Islam and Jihad and has had over the top cyber arguments with his own religious kind for him being on the wrong side to ISIS, expressing an opinion that is pro Australian,  etc. His frustration was probably more the LNP dill antagonising the wannabe ISIS idiots he had been at odds with rather than using rational words that are expected from those in governance.

What about all those dual citizenship Italians in the 60/70s who could and actually were called up for national service back in Italy? Would they have been stripped of their citizenship if they went of to Libya or somewhere? Afterall only 20 years before they were killing our soldiers in the deserts of Africa. Was the ABC fascist for reporting arrivals of poverty stricken Italians on boats in the fifties and sixties? What about the Jews escaping persecution by right wing governments, did the ABC get the rounds for reporting and journalising their situation?

Why, Noco, is Tony Abbott and his sycophants making out the appearance of a young fella with the same angry vocal voice, which BTW most of the young people back in the late sixties and early seventies had,  to be some leftie conspiracy promoting terrorism? Why is the ABC being caned for informing the public about matters that are of the utmost importance. Why can't we hear from the horse's mouth? 

You make no secret of your obsequious devotion to the LNP tribe and the Newscorp power of Chris (Dore) that compels you, but it would be nice to get a realist answer from you without propaganda slogans, if you are able to do that. I don't have an axe to grind with you and I don't dislike you and it would be refreshing if you were to move away from the cracked record about Fabians, Communists and their servile public broadcaster.


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

And just for the record I was a member of the QANDA discussion forum that became frustratingly over moderated (so much for democratic free speech and democracy in action). It was invariably the ALP tragics whose posts were spliced from the threads, not LNP dogmatists. It was the ALP members who were mainly sin binned for passionately arguing their case. It was obvious the people running the board were over the top in trying not to be seen as ALP leaning and that is not to say they were, coz I think it was ABC board member Janette Albrechtsen moderating


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> And just for the record I was a member of the QANDA discussion forum that became frustratingly over moderated (so much for democratic free speech and democracy in action). It was invariably the ALP tragics whose posts were spliced from the threads, not LNP dogmatists. It was the ALP members who were mainly sin binned for passionately arguing their case. It was obvious the people running the board were over the top in trying not to be seen as ALP leaning and that is not to say they were, coz I think it was ABC board member Janette Albrechtsen moderating




I can sympathise with that viewpoint comrade


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> And just for the record I was a member of the QANDA discussion forum that became frustratingly over moderated (so much for democratic free speech and democracy in action). It was invariably the ALP tragics whose posts were spliced from the threads, not LNP dogmatists. It was the ALP members who were mainly sin binned for passionately arguing their case. It was obvious the people running the board were over the top in trying not to be seen as ALP leaning and that is not to say they were, coz I think it was ABC board member Janette Albrechtsen moderating




Yes....I remember seeing you in the audience, sitting on your mothers lap.


----------



## Knobby22 (25 June 2015)

I remember when we had free speech.


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2015)

MrBurns said:


> We are just asking to be attacked and we will be eventually.




and that's the crux of the situation.


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> Yes....I remember seeing you in the audience, sitting on your mothers lap.




Ho ho ho, I laughed 'til I stopped at that one. 

I doubt you noticed anything through the rose coloured rage glasses you wore on that particular night.  Was I left of Tony or on his right? 


Yes Rumpole I was perceived on the right side of the street never to get a ban.. and I can't believe some of the stuff I got away with  ... I think you were a protected species n'est pas?  Even your arch enemies loved you I recall ... fricken suck


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> I remember when we had free speech.






What sought of seditious comment is that!!! Don't you be going around spreading  rumours we were a first world democratic country or you may lose your citizenship and birthrights. We got new improved legislation to handle your types and any of your associates who might be in your circle of friends and family.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

I would be interested to know if the panellists were aware beforehand of the questions they were going to be asked, and from whom they came.

Mr Ciobo seemed very aware of Mallah and his previous convictions, and if he knew beforehand of Mallah's appearance then it makes the confected outrage of the rednecks towards the ABC ridiculous. Ciobo could have just refused to turn up if he was afraid of a security risk or didn't want to give the guy publicity.


----------



## Knobby22 (25 June 2015)

I do think it was dumb though.
Right wing programs love talking to "terrorists" and the ABC should have left it to them or handled it much more carefully e.g. advising the politician and letting him get a win out of it. I think Q&A needs a revamp. A good idea would be to run it in Queensland where a less left audience could be easily obtained. The audience is a real problem.

There has been a tendency to shout down dissenting voices rather than argue the case with the present Government which is a worry. And as Amanda Vanstone says, Liberals traditionally stood up for freedoms while the socialist left of the political spectrum always wanted to limit them. For some reason both sides have been managed to curtail freedom of speech over the last 10 years. Tisme's dig is starting to get close to the truth.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> I do think it was dumb though.
> Right wing programs love talking to "terrorists" and the ABC should have left it to them or handled it much more carefully e.g. advising the politician and letting him get a win out of it. I think Q&A needs a revamp. A good idea would be to run it in Queensland where a less left audience could be easily obtained. The audience is a real problem.
> 
> There has been a tendency to shout down dissenting voices rather than argue the case with the present Government which is a worry. And as Amanda Vanstone says, Liberals traditionally stood up for freedoms while the socialist left of the political spectrum always wanted to limit them. For some reason both sides have been managed to curtail freedom of speech over the last 10 years. Tisme's dig is starting to get close to the truth.




I don't really see how you can guarantee a balanced audience, apart from holding the show in a Liberal seat one week, Labor next, then a Greens seat etc, and even that doesn't guarantee a balanced audience. It may be a start though.


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

I trust the authorities have this grub under surveillance 24/7....He certainly does not deserve to be an Australian citizen.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...head-should-roll/story-fnihmoiz-1227413335121

*The ABC yesterday apologised for its “error in judgment” amid a public backlash for giving Mallah, the first man to be charged under the Howard government’s terror laws, a platform on live television.

Acquitted of terror charges in 2005, he pleaded guilty to threatening to kill ASIO officials and has since travelled to Syria.

He had a heated exchange with MP Steven Ciobo on proposed laws to strip terrorists of their Australian citizenship on Q & A after Mr Ciobo said he would be comfortable blocking someone with Mallah’s past from living in Australia.

“I’m happy to look you in the eye and say that I’d be pleased to be part of the government that would say that you were out of the country,” Mr Ciobo said.

The one-time terror suspect appearing on Channel Ten show The Project.

The one-time terror suspect appearing on Channel 10 show “The Project”.

Mallah replied: “As an Australian I would be happy to see you out of this country” which received widespread applause from the show’s live studio audience. “The Liberals have just justified to many Australian Muslims in the community *tonight to leave and go to Syria and join ISIL because of ministers like him,” he continued, *before Q & A host Tony Jones *intervened.

He later tweeted: “I would pay to see that Minister dumped on #ISIS territory in Iraq!”

He later tweeted that he would “pay to see that Minister dumped on #ISIS territory in Iraq!’’.

Despite the admission from the ABC, Mallah said he stood by “everything I said” during the fiery exchange.

“It’s great that I’ve started a discussion. The so-called Islamic State would be extremely happy to hear what Steve Ciobo had to say on Q & A. It feeds into their recruitment propaganda,” he wrote in a letter to The Guardian defending his appearance.*


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2015)

The problem with Q & A  and most ABC current affairs programs, in my opinion is, you know what the bent of any debate is going to be.

It is a bit like the Bolt report, everyone knows what the agenda will be, so it is boring in its predictability.

The only people who watch either programme, will be people with the same political leanings, so they do little to change peoples views.

It is just a waste of talent, an expensive excercise, in preaching to the converted. IMO


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

sptrawler said:


> The problem with Q & A  and most ABC current affairs programs, in my opinion is, you know what the bent of any debate is going to be.
> 
> It is a bit like the Bolt report, everyone knows what the agenda will be, so it is boring in its predictability.
> 
> ...




There was period there where the show was almost always about Muslims and hurt feelings, Boat people and hurt feelings, gays and hurt feelings.. it became very tedious watching religiously disempowered women draped in their Saharan veils and sacks defending the freedom of a misogynistic paternal religion .... kind embarrassing really and the only thing missing was Cactus the Camel warming a seat in the audience.


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2015)

sptrawler said:


> The problem with Q & A  and most ABC current affairs programs, in my opinion is, you know what the bent of any debate is going to be.
> 
> It is a bit like the Bolt report, everyone knows what the agenda will be, so it is boring in its predictability.
> 
> ...




I agree that both those shows are predictable and a waste in that regard.

The only comment usually made is that the ABC is paid for by everyone whether they like the show or not whilst Bolt's program is paid for by people who like his show.


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> I agree that both those shows are predictable and a waste in that regard.
> 
> The only comment usually made is that the ABC is paid for by everyone whether they like the show or not whilst Bolt's program is paid for by people who like his show.




Yes, there is a difference between the two which many do not understand or will not accept that the ABC is paid for the tax payer, that the ABC is stacked with people appointed by the Fabian Society (the Democratic Socialist, communism ah la the Green/Labor Party) to control the propaganda and lies to be ever criticizing  a conservative government and its leader to meet its own dodgy  ideology and to finally control peoples lives in this country.

The ABC have a strict charter to follow in being unbiased and the ABC abuse that charter at every opportunity where as Channel 10 is an independent body which relies on advertising and if their programs are not entertaining , there ratings fall, advertising falls income falls and then they struggle to stay afloat.

So there is a marked difference between the two.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

Obviously, heads should roll at Channel 10 for their treasonous actions in giving voice to a convicted criminal.

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...pect-zaky-mallah/story-e6frfmyi-1227411719096


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

Why do we have to put up with this Mallah fellow when he talks about gang raping two female journalist on TV,

It is abusing the use of free speech which he states he has right to use.

He is mentally sick and should monitored, jailed or sent out of the country...We do not need this type of social welfare grub in our society.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ited-in-misogyny/story-e6frg6zo-1227413376037

*In the 21st century, the hard Left goes soft on men who attack liberal democracy and promote violence against women as long as such men belong to a Left-anointed minority.

Q&A host Tony Jones upbraided Mallah, but only after he had blamed the government for jihadism. And Tuesday’s limp corrective by the ABC falls well short of the explanation we need and the apology Australians deserv*


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> Why do we have to put up with this Mallah fellow when he talks about gang raping two female journalist on TV,
> 
> It is abusing the use of free speech which he states he has right to use.
> 
> He is mentally sick and should monitored, jailed or sent out of the country...We do not need this type of social welfare grub in our society.




I absolutely agree with you, we don't want his sort here. Unfortunately I believe that he was born here and is therefore an Australian citizen by birth and we can't get rid of him.


----------



## Tisme (25 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Obviously, heads should roll at Channel 10 for their treasonous actions in giving voice to a convicted criminal.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...pect-zaky-mallah/story-e6frfmyi-1227411719096




Worse than that we taxpayers actually indirectly fund much of the commercial stations with cheap spectrum (the Labor govt cut the rate from 9% to 4.5% which means we lose about $500m a year that could have half funded the ABC, which runs on a smaller income than the free to airs, but handles way more stations, channels and radio programs. 

Of course now the NBN is coming online the commercial stations will get free spectrum incase they switch to fibre.


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I absolutely agree with you, we don't want his sort here. Unfortunately I believe that he was born here and is therefore an Australian citizen by birth and we can't get rid of him.




Oh yes we can.....a stray bullet would make it easy.


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

Note this guys latest tweet....A survey he has started as to whether Julia Gillards throat should be slashed.

As much I dislike Julia Gillard, that is the last thing I would wish on her.

What a sick man.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/from_qas_latest_recruit/

*Mallah tweets the following :-

Australian citizen test : DO YOU SUPPORT THE THROAT SLASH OF AUSTRALIA'S FIRST PRIME MINISTER?

YES

NO.*

    i


----------



## chiff (25 June 2015)

Didn't Alan Jones want to tie Gillard in a bag and dump her out at sea?


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> The only comment usually made is that the ABC is paid for by everyone whether they like the show or not whilst Bolt's program is paid for by people who like his show.




That isn't really what disappoints me, I just find it a sad waste of good air time, they are really wasting their journalistic ability.IMO

I would like nothing more than to have my personal perceptions challenged, unfortunately there isn't any current affairs programmes that aren't predictable in their bias.

This in turn has a, "seen and heard it all before" message, so I can't be bothered watching any of them.

Why can't they present both sides of an arguement, and the pros and cons associated to the issue.

Why do they have to be obvious, when cutting off or speaking over, the interviewed subject. The arrogance even extends to speaking over and shouting down experts in the given subject.

When did Journalist become the source of all knowledge and truth, rather than the seekers of knowledge and truth.

It used to be that journalists provided the medium, for the truth to be exposed, now the truth is what the journalists believe.


----------



## DB008 (25 June 2015)

Inviting this guy on to Q&A was a very stupid idea.

The ABC should really have known better...


​


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

What a show it would be to have Tony Jones, Andrew Bolt, Bill Shorten and Tony Abbott all on the one show...Throw in Scott Morrison and Bowen.

Just as well Tony Abbott is a pugilist....


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> What a show it would be to have Tony Jones, Andrew Bolt, Bill Shorten and Tony Abbott all on the one show...Throw in Scott Morrison and Bowen.
> 
> Just as well Tony Abbott is a pugilist....




That is the sort of show we would be getting, if the journalists were unbiased and the guests had confidence in them being so.

Instead we get the garbage we recieve, from self opinionated, self obsessed journalists, that have an unbelievable regard for their own opinion.


----------



## ghotib (25 June 2015)

noco said:


> Oh yes we can.....a stray bullet would make it easy.




Mods,  Is this out of order please. Surely there's enough inflammatory overstatement coming from Canberra without ASF adding to the smoke and stink.


----------



## noco (25 June 2015)

ghotib said:


> Mods,  Is this out of order please. Surely there's enough inflammatory overstatement coming from Canberra without ASF adding to the smoke and stink.





Hmmm...I don't hear you complaining about Mallah ...see post #1911.


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2015)

ghotib said:


> Mods,  Is this out of order please. Surely there's enough inflammatory overstatement coming from Canberra without ASF adding to the smoke and stink.




I think the moderators cut noco a degree of slack, due to his service in Tobruk, the Burma railroad(for which the Burmese people are eternally grateful) the Kokoda trail and many other fights defending this fine country.


----------



## Tisme (26 June 2015)

ghotib said:


> Mods,  Is this out of order please. Surely there's enough inflammatory overstatement coming from Canberra without ASF adding to the smoke and stink.




you thinking pot/kettle/black too?


----------



## dutchie (26 June 2015)

Justice Wood, who sentenced Mallah in 2005 over making threats to kill an ASIO officer, warned about “sections of the media (who) gave him an entirely undeserved and unnecessary exposure. “Placing a person such as the prisoner into the public spotlight is … likely to encourage him to embark on even more outrageous and extravagant behaviour,” he said. 

So the ABC ignores the court's advice. So criticism of the ABC has nothing to do with free speech.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Justice Wood, who sentenced Mallah in 2005 over making threats to kill an ASIO officer, warned about “sections of the media (who) gave him an entirely undeserved and unnecessary exposure. “Placing a person such as the prisoner into the public spotlight is … likely to encourage him to embark on even more outrageous and extravagant behaviour,” he said.
> 
> So the ABC ignores the court's advice. So criticism of the ABC has nothing to do with free speech.




So why don't you criticise Channel 10 for the same offence ?

Failure to do so smells of an ideological war against the ABC for being an Independent broadcaster and not towing the government line. Of course if Labor was in power, some people would criticise them for towing the government line.


The ABC and Channel 10 have done the public a favour my exposing Mallah and showing what a nasty creature he is. The public need to know that there are people like him around and what dangers they present.


----------



## Knobby22 (26 June 2015)

The guys behaviour has changed over the years. 
He is much more moderate. The bad stuff happened in 2005.

Rumours are Abbott is planning an election based on getting Shorten compromised, ABC neutered before Bishop challenges.


----------



## drsmith (26 June 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> The guys behaviour has changed over the years.
> He is much more moderate. The bad stuff happened in 2005.
> 
> Rumours are Abbott is planning an election based on getting Shorten compromised, ABC neutered before Bishop challenges.



If that's the case then on his recent public commentary, I wouldn't like to have seen what he would have been like in 2005. 

Toby Abbott would be insane to go to an early election and talk of such is just a media beat up.


----------



## bellenuit (26 June 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> The guys behaviour has changed over the years.
> He is much more moderate. The bad stuff happened in 2005.
> 
> Rumours are Abbott is planning an election based on getting Shorten compromised, ABC neutered before Bishop challenges.




Have you read his recent tweets?  However, bad as they are, I suspect he is just trying to get attention.


----------



## ghotib (26 June 2015)

Tisme said:


> you thinking pot/kettle/black too?




Not exactly, tho there's an awful lot of it around. I was thinking more of the increasingly casual way we're all talking about differences of opinion as if they're blood feuds or worse. Not to mention treating young men going through an idiot phase like invaders from a galaxy far, far away. True, some young men don't grow out of being idiots, but careless talk of bullets won't change that.


----------



## Macquack (26 June 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I think the moderators cut noco a degree of slack, due to his *service in Tobruk*, the *Burma railroad*(for which the Burmese people are eternally grateful) the *Kokoda trail *and many other fights defending this fine country.




Are you taking the piss?

Clarification is in order, I thought the only thing Noco had done for Australia was unblock a few sewer pipes?

For the record, I have done nothing of note for Australia.


----------



## noco (27 June 2015)

Macquack said:


> Are you taking the piss?
> 
> Clarification is in order, I thought the only thing Noco had done for Australia was unblock a few sewer pipes?
> 
> For the record, I have done nothing of note for Australia.





Yes I had my early days as a plumber and drainer and I did unblock a few blocked drains and I came across some sewer rats just like some on this forum...Brings me back memories.


----------



## noco (27 June 2015)

Mike Kenny sums up the inadequacies of the ABC and their hatred of Tony Abbott and all conservative governments.

Has it done them any good?....to the contrary they and the Labor Party are far worse for wear. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...416972385?sv=4f274c1646e23c3416ba6ce7cbe776a0

*Even a jihadist sympathiser and convicted criminal who disseminates public threats of sexual violence against women was given an ABC platform — anything for a gotcha moment against the evil Abbott government.

Given this is the program’s schtick, the studio audience applauded. The mentality at play was brilliantly mocked by the iconoclastic John Safran (whose talent, to give due credit, was unearthed by the ABC). “I’m a man who keeps a woman hostage down a hole,” Safran tweeted, “and dances around in a human skin suit … who hates Tony Abbott! *Q&A audience applauds.”

This time it backfired. Not only did this ugly episode fail to embarrass the government, it actually helped to underline the Coal*ition’s argument for tougher anti-terrorism laws, while also inflicting enormous self-harm on the national broadcaster.

This is the problem with hatred as a motivating force for political strategy; it leads to misguided *decisions. “Hatred is blind,” as Alexandre Dumas warned, “rage carries you away; and he who pours out vengeance runs the risk of tasting a bitter draught.”

As attacks on Abbott become more unhinged, the Left appears more desperate and out of touch.

To be fair, we were reminded of transgressions on the Right this week on The Killing Season when a teary-eyed Craig Emerson recounted his distress at signs labelling Julia Gillard a witch or bitch.

These were placards from a fringe group and Abbott paid a high price for being at that event, even though the signs were moved into place after he took the stage.

There is no comparison to the way the Left invokes hatred in the core of its arguments.
*
Poor old Craig Emerson shed a crocodile tear for his ex lover Julia Gillard...Emerson, a married man with kids carried on with Julia for 3 years.


----------



## trainspotter (27 June 2015)

Macquack said:


> Are you taking the piss?
> 
> Clarification is in order, I thought the only thing Noco had done for Australia was unblock a few sewer pipes?
> 
> For the record, I have done nothing of note for Australia.




RESPECT !

Clarification is adhered to.

Me either .... other than lived and enjoyed our freedom of lifestyle.


----------



## dutchie (28 June 2015)

Barrie Cassidy's colors where again on display when interviewing Malcolm Turnbull on Insiders this morning.

Malcolm started the interview very diplomatically until Cassidy made him explode. It was refreshing to see Malcolm take it up to Cassidy and he made Cassidy look like a fool.

The Prime Minister asked the ABC "whose side are you on", when he knows the answer.

The ABC is on the side of anyone (including terrorists) who they can use to criticise Abbott and/or the Coalition.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Barrie Cassidy's colors where again on display when interviewing Malcolm Turnbull on Insiders this morning.
> 
> Malcolm started the interview very diplomatically until Cassidy made him explode. It was refreshing to see Malcolm take it up to Cassidy and he made Cassidy look like a fool.
> 
> ...




On the contrary Cassidy tied Turnbull in knots. 

He could not answer the question "if this guy Mallah is so dangerous, why isn't he locked up" ? Can't Asio guarantee our safety from this person ?

Turnbull just looked ridiculous and sputtered when Cassidy suggested the guy could just walk into a shopping mall and be the same sort of threat that he allegedly is in an ABC studio.

The whole government rhetoric against the ABC on this matter is an ideological crusade based on nothing more than hatred for a public broadcaster that some rabid Righties believe should not exist at all.


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

noco said:


> Yes I had my early days as a plumber and drainer and I did unblock a few blocked drains and I came across some sewer rats just like some on this forum...Brings me back memories.




With all seriousness, I did some plumbing for my house and parent's house - Plumbing is one of the most important job in society (and plumbers do act and charge that way too, you bastards). Once finished, those pipes, with the wye and the elbows and P traps, they look like a work of art - especially when all the downpipes stick up perfectly vertical. And the copper... when you heat them right and they glow and the silver just melt to the touch..


----------



## dutchie (28 June 2015)

'You've lost the plot, Barrie': Malcolm Turnbull

Cassidy has not lost the plot - he knows exactly what it is - a gotcha moment against the Coalition (whatever it takes).


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> On the contrary Cassidy tied Turnbull in knots.
> 
> He could not answer the question "if this guy Mallah is so dangerous, why isn't he locked up" ? Can't Asio guarantee our safety from this person ?
> 
> ...




Sometime you wonder how these politician get out of bed in the morning and face the world.

The guy's been charged, pleaded guilty, serve his sentence, been freed for a decade, presumably haven't done or plan to commit any crime or violence... and our ministers and prime minister goes nuts about him being in the same room with one of them on live TV where he does nothing but ask a question.


----------



## dutchie (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> The guy's been charged, pleaded guilty, serve his sentence, been freed for a decade, presumably haven't done or plan to commit any crime or violence...




Yes he's a real choirboy.


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Yes he's a real choirboy.




I'm not defending him or think he's this and that.
But we're a nation of law, with due process and all that.  So once a person has serve his sentence, what do you expect to be done of them? Lock them up again and throw away the key just because a few people would sleep better? 

If you want that, then pass a law, or call some black op on the guy.

I thought it's good for democracy when there's check and balances, when there's different opinions presented. But ey, if we want our media to report what the gov't want only, sure why not. Who doesn't love to hear how glorious the dear leaders are and how evil the other empire is.


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2015)

The transcript of the exchange,



> BARRY CASSIDY: Will there be recommendations? Will you be suggesting, for example, that they change their protocols around decision-making?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Well, let me say, we've got to find out what happened. And that is not questioning editorial, that is not telling them what to do. Under Section 8 of the act, the Minister has the power to write a letter to the ABC and make recommendations of policy which the board can either accept or ignore.
> 
> ...




My bolds.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2015/s4263264.htm


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2015)

In another twist, Labor frontbencher Joel Fitzgibbon has now turned to blaming Steven Ciobo for the original incident according to the following press article,



> Mr Turnbull’s comments come after Labor frontbencher Joel Fitzgibbon accused parliamentary secretary Steven Ciobo of deliberately inflaming the situation when Mallah aired his views on the ABC’s Q&A program.
> 
> “He was seeking a rise out of Zaky Mallah because he knew what the outcome would be for the ABC and his ... electoral prospects,” Labor’s Joel Fitzgibbon told Sky News today.




http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...ky-mallah-on-q-a/story-e6frfmyi-1227418615401


----------



## trainspotter (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> Sometime you wonder how these politician get out of bed in the morning and face the world.
> 
> The guy's been charged, pleaded guilty, serve his sentence, been freed for a decade, presumably haven't done or plan to commit any crime or violence... and our ministers and prime minister goes nuts about him being in the same room with one of them on live TV where he does nothing but ask a question.




I believe it was the inflection in his rhetoric and the ABC to run it a second time free to air and on ABC iview that poked the sleeping bear into action. 

He was let off on a technicality and not judged by his peers as he was a minor at the time and yet here he is on our Aunty ABC with a GOLD mull leaf five panel hat and calling young Muslims to arms by stating this government is turning them into resistance fighters in another country?

Every interview thereafter turned to prime time stupidity by very senior staffers at the ABC !! Who released the memo to put this iriot on telly with a loaded "question"? "Heads will roll" was the headline splashed across the rags. Abbott is smelling a rat and it is wearing a tad thin as trashy headlines. Business as usual and LWNJ has had his 15 minutes of fame.


----------



## noco (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> I'm not defending him or think he's this and that.
> But we're a nation of law, with due process and all that.  So once a person has serve his sentence, what do you expect to be done of them? Lock them up again and throw away the key just because a few people would sleep better?
> 
> If you want that, then pass a law, or call some black op on the guy.
> ...




If Zaky Mallah was your son and he states that two prominent female journalist should be publicly raped on TV, how would you react?
With the state of mind of this grub, his brain could snap any time....He should be under constant surveillance 24/7 if is not already after the QandA show.


----------



## noco (28 June 2015)

drsmith said:


> The transcript of the exchange,
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Cassidy was the one who became agitated when Turnbull put him on the spot.


----------



## MrBurns (28 June 2015)

noco said:


> Cassidy was the one who became agitated when Turnbull put him on the spot.





Malcolm's good


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

noco said:


> If Zaky Mallah was your son and he states that two prominent female journalist should be publicly raped on TV, how would you react?
> With the state of mind of this grub, his brain could snap any time....He should be under constant surveillance 24/7 if is not already after the QandA show.




Like I said, if he is deem an imminent threat to society, charge him and take him to court. If found guilty by law, sentence etc. etc.

Otherwise, you will have to presume he is innocent.. keep watch or whatever, but you cannot bar him from his right to free speech, or stop him from being in public. To demand that because he could snap and do god knows what... trust me, you don't want to live in a society where people can be lock up "just in case".


----------



## noco (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> Like I said, if he is deem an imminent threat to society, charge him and take him to court. If found guilty by law, sentence etc. etc.
> 
> Otherwise, you will have to presume he is innocent.. keep watch or whatever, but you cannot bar him from his right to free speech, or stop him from being in public. To demand that because he could snap and do god knows what... trust me, you don't want to live in a society where people can be lock up "just in case".




Yes and free board and lodgings thanks to the Australian tax payer.....You can bet your a$se he does not have a job......Who would dare employe him?

Nothing to do but to think and plot his next move and yes, he cannot be arrested until he again commits some stupid crime....His brain will be working overtime after last Monday.


----------



## Duckman#72 (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> Otherwise, you will have to presume he is innocent.. keep watch or whatever, but you cannot bar him from his right to free speech, or stop him from being in public. To demand that because he could snap and do god knows what... trust me, you don't want to live in a society where people can be lock up "just in case".




You are falling into the same problem as the ABC -"that shows we are independent. Everyone is entitled to free speech etc etc". 

I completely agree. He is entitled to his right to free speech - but that doesn't entitle him to be invited to share those views via a national  platform like the ABC. Let him go to the local shopping centre and get on his soapbox. Let him spend his money on flyers, pamphlets and brochures encouraging the hatred, let him hire halls and community centres if he chooses - but for goodness sake don't give someone who has threatened to kill fellow Australians a free kick (sorry - it wasn't just "free", the tax payer paid for him to come into the studio!!!)

Duckman


----------



## pixel (28 June 2015)

The ABC, and a day later Channel Ten with Waheed Ali taking him to task, has shown the kind of nut job this fellow is/ was. If we deny guys like M'Allah the opportunity to present their ideas on an Open Forum, they'll spread the vitriol in secret in closed social media groups and mosque "prayer groups" where they won't be exposed to counter arguments and rebuke. *Are we really that immature as a society that we need our Government's spin doctors and propaganda machine to decide what we are allowed to say, hear, and think?*

Not so long ago, Joseph Goebbels *) had similar ideas. Look how successful he was! It's a pity that spending cuts to our Education system are now affecting History lessons to such an extent that nobody recognises the dangers of attempts at public mind control and Government propaganda.

*)







> Joseph Goebbels had been brought up in a Jesuit college and was a seminarian before devoting himself to literature and politics.


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2015)

noco said:


> Cassidy was the one who became agitated when Turnbull put him on the spot.



We know how well the ABC feels that exchange went for them by where it's appeared on their news page.


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

Duckman#72 said:


> You are falling into the same problem as the ABC -"that shows we are independent. Everyone is entitled to free speech etc etc".
> 
> I completely agree. He is entitled to his right to free speech - but that doesn't entitle him to be invited to share those views via a national  platform like the ABC. Let him go to the local shopping centre and get on his soapbox. Let him spend his money on flyers, pamphlets and brochures encouraging the hatred, let him hire halls and community centres if he chooses - but for goodness sake don't give someone who has threatened to kill fellow Australians a free kick (sorry - it wasn't just "free", the tax payer paid for him to come into the studio!!!)
> 
> Duckman




I heard from a debate on ABC that the guy's against ISIS, that he's always been against them and in his blogs have said no Australian should go, that is, do not join ISIS. 

ISIS is our number one enemy right?

Anyway, I don't know the details about him or what he did ten years ago.. .as far as I am concern, our court system punished him, our current security agencies deem him safe enough to not lock him up or charge him with any crime. Doesn't the fact that he had served his time, having admitted guilt for threatening to kill ASIO officers... you can argue he's not rehabilitated and is scheming etc. etc.... well let's not lock people we don't like the look and sound of shall we.

As to the ABC inviting him on... I saw the replay and thought the question was fine. He didn't encourage people to join ISIS, he said it's talks like what's his name that some Muslims and Australian chose to go.

No one was harmed during the filming, no one in the gov't thought he's that much of a danger all these ten years but suddenly he's made out to be the greatest threat and our court and law have failed us yet again. The court and the leftist lynch mob at ABC apparently.


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2015)

Larry Pickering's take,

http://pickeringpost.com/story/an-angry-turnbull-tears-cassidy-a-new-one/5060

Michael Smith,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...-in-a-verbal-stoush-barrie-cassidys-not-.html


----------



## trainspotter (28 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> I heard from a debate on ABC that the guy's against ISIS, that he's always been against them and in his blogs have said no Australian should go, that is, do not join ISIS.
> 
> ISIS is our number one enemy right?
> 
> ...




Man Haron Monis, anyone ,,,, anyone???


----------



## luutzu (28 June 2015)

trainspotter said:


> Man Haron Monis, anyone ,,,, anyone???




So what's your solution? Lock up all Muslims? Lock up anyone critical of Australian policies? Anyone who's political?

And I'm not saying those two are the normal critics or nice or whatever... I don't know and don't care to know about them. The issue here is much bigger than them two.

There's a whole bunch of issues confronting us, a lot of questions to be raised about a free and independent press, about gov't and division of power etc. etc....  and we're focusing on some stupid kid saying stupid things ten years ago and asking dumb questions like whose side is the ABC on; isn't it reckless of the ABC to bus him together with other invitees... well, he's been catching the bus or train or ferry all these times too... who do we blame for that? Sydney Trains or Transport NSW?

If the guy is such a threat, shouldn't the blame be on the gov't for letting him roaming around our streets? Maybe Abbott might want to thank the ABC for inviting the guy on so the gov't is reminded of how threatening he is and why he's not in prison somewhere.

Reminds me of latest killing in the US... it's not the guns, or the lack of education, or the failure of economic policies that alienate certain part of the community... nope, it's the confederate flag that's the problem.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> So what's your solution? Lock up all Muslims? Lock up anyone critical of Australian policies? Anyone who's political?




Apparently this guy issued a tweet that said that two prominent female journalists should be publicly raped. That goes beyond freedom of speech in my book and is an incitement to violence for which he should be jailed, or at least have restrictions n his movements like being electronically monitored or having to report to police every day. 

The guy is a creep and needs to be watched carefully.


----------



## noco (29 June 2015)

*Greens Leftist politics continues to pervade Australia’s school curricula. Like Gillard-installed Mark Scott still ruling the agenda of our national broadcaster the ABC, the Leftist propaganda pervades Australian society as though Rudd-Gillard were still in power.*

This is an extract from my post # 148 ... "Communism : It is not dead and buried."

Mark Scott is a Fabian (communist) through and through as is Gillard.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

Should be an interesting Four Corners tonight, allegations of Mafia infiltration of politicians and political bribery of  both parties.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...nked-to-senior-australian-politicians/6579076


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Should be an interesting Four Corners tonight, allegations of Mafia infiltration of politicians and political bribery of  both parties.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...nked-to-senior-australian-politicians/6579076




That's gotta be a Fabian conspiracy, right? Has the show been endorsed and certified by the stanchly unbiased News Corp, Bolt, Akerman, or Alan Jones? Howard Sattler been contacted to make sure Four Corners is good journalism?

Remember DCI Peter Fox and his concern about a Catholic Mafia? We have an Oz government and opposition who's spiritual obedience is at odds with the Crown's religion.

Should be good ratings tonight on Qanda tonight. Nobody puts Tony in the corner. 

I think is was Barrie Cassidy who made it clear there is the High Court of Australia and then there is the ABC, followed by lesser organisations like parliament.

Just back on Akerman the grownup (not):
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...s/grubby_excuses_cannot_erase_the_abcs_shame/


----------



## pixel (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Apparently this guy issued a tweet that said that two prominent female journalists should be publicly raped. That goes beyond freedom of speech in my book and is an incitement to violence for which he should be jailed, or at least have restrictions n his movements like being electronically monitored or having to report to police every day.
> 
> The guy is a creep and needs to be watched carefully.




Based on that logic, shouldn't then the people holding or standing in front of signs "Ditch the Witch" (or was it "Bitch" ?) be sentenced to the same?

*Grow up, people, and engage in rational argument with each other.* Take the opportunity to expose creeps - whether on Left, Right, or Anarchist fringe - as just that. Credit Australians with the brains to make up their own minds!


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

pixel said:


> Based on that logic, shouldn't then the people holding or standing in front of signs "Ditch the Witch" (or was it "Bitch" ?) be sentenced to the same?
> 
> *Grow up, people, and engage in rational argument with each other.* Take the opportunity to expose creeps - whether on Left, Right, or Anarchist fringe - as just that. Credit Australia with the brains to make up their own minds!




So, are you saying it's fine that people should be allowed to encourage others to commit a crime ?

"Ditch the witch" repugnant though it is, could simply mean "throw out" in an electoral sense. I don't see how you could equate that to encouraging people to rape a woman. Commonsense should tell you that the two incidences have important differences.


----------



## noco (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Should be an interesting Four Corners tonight, allegations of Mafia infiltration of politicians and political bribery of  both parties.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-...nked-to-senior-australian-politicians/6579076



With the leftist Kerry O'Brien at the helm of Four Corners you can bet your boots he will do his best to associate John Howard with the mafia.
Howard was supposed to have shaken the hand of one of the mafia and it has already been alleged Howard would not have know his connection.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

noco said:


> With the leftist Kerry O'Brien at the helm of Four Corners you can bet your boots he will do his best to associate John Howard with the mafia.
> Howard was supposed to have shaken the hand of one of the mafia and it has already been alleged Howard would not have know his connection.




I don't think that Howard personally would have known if an individual was a Mafioso, and certainly would have been stupid to meet with him if he did, but his party accepted donations from such people and was influenced by them. 

The incident of Vanstone giving a visa to a Mafia boss is well known, how many others ?


----------



## noco (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think that Howard personally would have known if an individual was a Mafioso, and certainly would have been stupid to meet with him if he did, but his party accepted donations from such people and was influenced by them.
> 
> The incident of Vanstone giving a visa to a Mafia boss is well known, how many others ?




Yes, it will interesting to hear what comes out of O' Briens poisoned tongue.


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So, are you saying it's fine that people should be allowed to encourage others to commit a crime ?
> 
> "Ditch the witch" repugnant though it is, could simply mean "throw out" in an electoral sense. I don't see how you could equate that to encouraging people to rape a woman. Commonsense should tell you that the two incidences have important differences.




How about "heads should roll at ABC"? 

No one is supporting the guy or support threats or violence as free speech. What we're saying is let's hear it. Let them make a fool of themselves, let hear different opinions and not just asks for heads to roll and sharpen our pitch fork whenever someone is saying something we don't like or find offensive.

Not to defend the guy but I before he ask his question, he did say something like: I was young and say and did something stupid that I served my time for... etc.

But if you listen to our gov't, it's as if the guy could have strap bombs and kill people on live TV or something.


Anyway, the bigger issue is media independence. We need it. 

I don't think the ABC is that independent anyway, but at least there some debates, some in-depth analysis and investigative programming... the other media are all bought off, literally, by either the corporate sponsors or find it too much of an expense to investigate or question anything - so they simply report what the gov't say and report and focus on things that doesn't offend the sponsors' sense of "fairness".

Why do you think the gov't is making such a big deal out of this anyway? So that in the next budget, funding will be further slash and not too many "real" Australians care for it. The CEO will be replaced and the new one will find it smarter to just go along and keep everyone (in power) happy.


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2015)

noco said:


> With the leftist Kerry O'Brien at the helm of Four Corners you can bet your boots he will do his best to associate John Howard with the mafia.
> Howard was supposed to have shaken the hand of one of the mafia and it has already been alleged Howard would not have know his connection.





The Mafia? prfft... they're small time hustlers compare to Big Business and their control and influence over government - of either party.

With the proposed Trans-Pacific free trade agreement (TPP), they will really kick Mother Nature in the face and stomp all over government and their "responsibility" towards their citizens too.

Pretty amazing how any government could ask and "consult" with industry on how to regulate them. Wouldn't it be nice if the gov't asks me how much tax I should pay or how much fine I should pay if I break the law or how I could sue them if they can't find me a job that pays my expected salary. But the same crazy scenario happens every day and we're all cool with it.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> How about "heads should roll at ABC"?
> 
> No one is supporting the guy or support threats or violence as free speech. What we're saying is let's hear it. Let them make a fool of themselves, let hear different opinions and not just asks for heads to roll and sharpen our pitch fork whenever someone is saying something we don't like or find offensive.
> 
> ...




No way I'm defending what Abbott said about the ABC. I'm actually congratulating the ABC for bringing this person into the spotlight and showing us the sort of person he is. Whether that was the ABC's intention is another matter, but the ABC should be 'on the side' of reality and the reality is that such people as Mallah exist and we should be aware of them.

The government's overblown rhetoric indicates, as I've said before, a ideological vendetta against the ABC. 

"Heads should roll" is a stupidly extremist statement when our national leader should be taking a calm and rational approach,  providing some sort of contrast to the other extremists out there.


----------



## drsmith (29 June 2015)

More commentary from Malcolm Turnbull,



> Speaking on Sky News on Sunday night, Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Mallah's appearance could not be brushed off as an "error of judgment" and said there needed to be "serious consequences" as a result of the incident.
> 
> "We are entitled to know … who made those calls and why, and then people can draw their own conclusions. It's up to the management and the board to make decisions about it but there certainly should be some consequences to this," he said.
> 
> ...




Australian Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson,



> "Over the past week, I have vacillated as a private citizen about whether I go on because I am not happy with Q&A's conduct last week but as Human Rights Commissioner I feel an obligation to go on Q&A and explain what free speech actually means," Mr Wilson said.




Both government representatives are now boycotting tonight's Q&A.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ge-pulls-out-of-qa-appearance-20150629-gi05cy


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

drsmith said:


> Both government representatives are now boycotting tonight's Q&A.




Thereby giving a free kick to Labor. Well done bozos


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> No way I'm defending what Abbott said about the ABC. I'm actually congratulating the ABC for bringing this person into the spotlight and showing us the sort of person he is. Whether that was the ABC's intention is another matter, but the ABC should be 'on the side' of reality and the reality is that such people as Mallah exist and we should be aware of them.
> 
> The government's overblown rhetoric indicates, as I've said before, a ideological vendetta against the ABC.
> 
> "Heads should roll" is a stupidly extremist statement when our national leader should be taking a calm and rational approach,  providing some sort of contrast to the other extremists out there.




They always try to outdo ISIS or something.

You Deash Death Cult, you reckon you can terrorise Australians? I'll show you!

"All a person need to be a terrorist is a knife, an iPhone, and a victim".


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Thereby giving a free kick to Labor. Well done bozos




Yea, I'd like softball questions too.

People are either with us or against us; not being with us is just unAustralian.


----------



## Logique (29 June 2015)

How unpalatable they find it, a little taste of their own medicine. 

ABC staffers playing the victim for all they're worth. Not much of a sense of irony though.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/
> 
> ..“Many [ABC] staff have been distressed by the accusation of ‘betrayal’, the inappropriate call that ‘heads must roll’ and barrage of recent offensive headlines and fake pictures featuring ABC staff providing makeup for Isis terrorists and the ABC logo on an Isis flag …”
> 
> “I urge staff to stand strong in the face of such intimidation and to *maintain our statutory commitment to fearless, impartial and independent coverage*,” Peacock, a senior journalist on 7.30, said..


----------



## pixel (29 June 2015)

Logique said:


> How unpalatable they find it, a little taste of their own medicine.
> 
> ABC staffers playing the victim for all they're worth. Not much of a sense of irony though.
> View attachment 63179




Isn't it the pinnacle of hypocrisy when a News journo accuses his ABC colleagues of bias?

"Here, Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, this is Pot." comes to mind. Carrying on like kids on a playground.


----------



## Logique (29 June 2015)

Don't attempt to trivialize this with a straw man argument.

The ABC is the national broadcaster. It has a legal charter to be balanced and impartial. The ABC is funded by taxpayers. 

News is a private company, if you don't like their publications, don't read them.


----------



## Logique (29 June 2015)

Miranda Devine is one of the female journalists that ABC Q&A guest Zaky Mallah is on record as suggesting ought to be gang raped. 

His reward - an ABC chauffered appearance on a nationally broadcasted podium, where he could suggest to a Minister of the Crown that he ought to leave the country.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg.../abcs_qa_gives_oxygen_to_enemies_of_the_west/
> 
> ABC’s Q&A gives succour to enemies of the West
> 
> ...


----------



## jank (29 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It's there to publish stories and points of view that don't get published elsewhere.




Nope, you are wrong. You should check the ABC's own terms of reference. Even if that were the case, should the ABC give favorable treatment to neo-Nazi's cause their view's do not get aired elsewhere?

The same thing is after happening with the BBC, which even the BBC admit is a problem. They commissioned a report a few years ago about it and their own internal findings gave way to a blatant left wing bias. They have no done anything to remedy the situation though.


----------



## Duckman#72 (29 June 2015)

luutzu said:


> I heard from a debate on ABC that the guy's against ISIS, that he's always been against them and in his blogs have said no Australian should go, that is, do not join ISIS.
> 
> ISIS is our number one enemy right?




There are thousands of respectable, knowledgeable, rational Muslims who could have come on and expressed their anti-ISIS views. Apart from the "thrill" factor why choose this guy, with his bomb threats, gangbang twitter accounts and so on?  

Duckman


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2015)

Duckman#72 said:


> There are thousands of respectable, knowledgeable, rational Muslims who could have come on and expressed their anti-ISIS views. Apart from the "thrill" factor why choose this guy, with his bomb threats, gangbang twitter accounts and so on?
> 
> Duckman




I'm sure the ABC got him on for the shock factor, but maybe it's good TV for someone who, like the question he was asking, would have had his citizenship revoke and banish under the current proposed law.

Anyway, I won't be too hang up on ISIS. They're a terrible bunch of crazies and deserve what they're getting... but given how war and politics aren't exactly about good against evil, given how US General Petraeus did spent some $500 million US dollars buying off the Sunni insurgents during the much glorified "Surge" in Iraq and "won", the Saudi being a close ally, the also crazy but more organised Israeli... it's not going to be a big surprise if they're bought off and won't be so evil if it's more convenient and we want peace with honour and all that.

I mean, look at Iran - not so evil now is it? Not that much of an existential threat to Israel now that uncle sam thought maybe having wars on too many front might not be a good idea, especially when it's a proxy with Russia in the Ukraine and another potentially bigger one containing China in the Pacific - you don't really want to be too occupied with other minor fronts in the entire Middle East and North Africa and South Asia.

Man, there's a bunch of wars, potential clashes between major powers, economic collapse (again), climate change and potential natural disaster of biblical proportion... and we're all shook up over some idiot. We are quite the lucky country.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2015)

Not a word of criticism from the anti Aunty mob about Mallah appearing on Channel 10's The Project the night after the Q&A show.

Kinda makes me wonder whether this is just another anti ABC vendetta rather than any attempt at a rational debate.


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not a word of criticism from the anti Aunty mob about Mallah appearing on Channel 10's The Project the night after the Q&A show.
> 
> Kinda makes me wonder whether this is just another anti ABC vendetta rather than any attempt at a rational debate.




First you brand them as un-Australian, as leftist socialist fabian lynch mob... then you cut their funding. That'll teach the realist among them to get in line real smart.

I still remember watching Fast Forward way back then when they did a skit during the Howard years where ABC was cut to the point where Kerry O'Brien was presenting the news with just a light globe barely hanging and some fabric for background. 

Lucky they got Play School paying for most of the stuff.


----------



## pixel (30 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not a word of criticism from the anti Aunty mob about Mallah appearing on Channel 10's The Project the night after the Q&A show.
> 
> Kinda makes me wonder whether *this is just another anti ABC vendetta rather than any attempt at a rational debate*.




of course it is.
Abbott is concerned that some sectors of Australia's media are subjecting his irrational scaremongering to scrutiny. Scared that people might see the propaganda for what it is: A grab for ongoing power under the cloak of secrecy and claims of National Security. In reality, it's all about suppression of different ideas that might jeopardise his plans of becoming the Supreme Leader of a White, Catholic Australia, neatly divided in Rulers and Serfs.


----------



## wayneL (30 June 2015)

This thread is getting ridiculous.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2015)

wayneL said:


> This thread is getting ridiculous.




So is the rhetoric from the Right Wing loonies.

To see Tim Wilson , *Human Rights Commissioner* (WTF ???) who has prided himself on defending the rights (as he sees it) of people to be "offensive" suddenly deciding that he and his right wing cohorts have the monopoly on deciding what constitutes offensive behaviour, is completely laughable. 

That man's hypocrisy is blatant, he is someone who ideologically dislikes the ABC and will attack it at every opportunity. He has no credibility at all on this issue.


----------



## dutchie (30 June 2015)

Tim Wilson owned the ABC and Tony Jones in particular.

Jones continually interrupted his answers, including a snide comment which Wilson rightly called him out on.


----------



## chiff (30 June 2015)

It was good to see someone different on the panel-an intellectual.(Krauss). He was able to cut through the tit for tat political crap.
There has to be a better standard of debate and conversation somewhere and you will not find it from politicians and their handmaidens.
Politicians trying to drag the debate down to their level for political advantage like "two bald men fighting over a comb"


----------



## noco (30 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So is the rhetoric from the Right Wing loonies.
> 
> To see Tim Wilson , *Human Rights Commissioner* (WTF ???) who has prided himself on defending the rights (as he sees it) of people to be "offensive" suddenly deciding that he and his right wing cohorts have the monopoly on deciding what constitutes offensive behaviour, is completely laughable.
> 
> That man's hypocrisy is blatant, he is someone who ideologically dislikes the ABC and will attack it at every opportunity. He has no credibility at all on this issue.




Are you saying Tony Jones and the ABC are credible?......They set up a "GOTCHA" ambush to embarrass the Liberal Party and it back fired......If the ABC and Jones consider themselves legitimate in what they did, why did they apologize and admit it was a mistake?

I think we all know who lost credibility.


----------



## MrBurns (30 June 2015)

I'm disappointed in Jones I thought he was better than that. The show has lost some credibility now.


----------



## pixel (30 June 2015)

chiff said:


> It was good to see someone different on the panel-an intellectual.(Krauss). He was able to cut through the tit for tat political crap.



Sadly, the not-so-intellectual panelists failed to listen; they kept shouting over him and each other and didn't even realise how ridiculous they made themselves appear. A point well picked up by one tweet that _took it as a comment, four kids yelling over each other._



> There has to be a better standard of debate and conversation somewhere and you will not find it from politicians and their handmaidens.
> Politicians trying to drag the debate down to their level for political advantage like "two bald men fighting over a comb"



That's the saddest part of it. Australians deserve better politicians than the current self-serving mob.


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Tim Wilson owned the ABC and Tony Jones in particular.
> 
> Jones continually interrupted his answers, including a snide comment which Wilson rightly called him out on.



Tony Jones in his opening statement also blew the free speech defence that he and the ABC are so doggedly clinging to,



> On Monday night, host Tony Jones said the Q&A team was not aware of Mr Mallah's "very offensive misogynistic tweet that he put out about two female journalists".
> 
> "Had we known [about the tweets], we would have rejected his participation," Jones said.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-30/qanda-zaky-mallah-explanation-lacks-logic-steven-ciobo/6582342


----------



## noco (30 June 2015)

Janet Albrechsten sums up the ABC in a nutshell.

The ABC have become a radicalized opportunistic organisation who are intent on destroying democracy and the very reason why they are tax payer funded.

Enough is enough with these left wing socialist cronies and it is high time Turnbull and the government took lots of action starting with the replacement of Mark Scott and working down the line.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...420620474?sv=748305ad285ada937557535290d57e90


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2015)

dutchie said:


> Tim Wilson owned the ABC and Tony Jones in particular.
> 
> Jones continually interrupted his answers, including a snide comment which Wilson rightly called him out on.




Tim must have put his chin out, because sucker punches are Tony's forte. I must watch the show tonight to see what I missed


----------



## moXJO (30 June 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not a word of criticism from the anti Aunty mob about Mallah appearing on Channel 10's The Project the night after the Q&A show.
> 
> Kinda makes me wonder whether this is just another anti ABC vendetta rather than any attempt at a rational debate.




ABC isn't a commercial station. And they set the ball rolling. You want to explain why ABC should resort to gutter journalism on the taxpayers purse when it is suppose to be impartial?

Here is what the ABC did wrong. They got this guy in for a pure "Gotcha" moment. Some dkhead planning the show thought it was a good idea to not only throw this in the governments face but to destroy this young man in the process. They set this up for fireworks and it blew up in their face. Oh but the ABC walk away and the guy they used well he didn't matter anyway.

Mark Scott is an idiot living with the fairies and the leftards at the ABC have indeed lost the plot. Even on last nights episode Tony Jones was doing his best to point fingers at everyone after a very hollow apology. It was literally minutes in before he was attempting another "gotcha" finger point.


----------



## wayneL (30 June 2015)

pixel said:


> That's the saddest part of it. Australians deserve better politicians than the current self-serving mob.




Actually, no they don't. That's why they have the politicians they do.


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2015)

wayneL said:


> Actually, no they don't. That's why they have the politicians they do.




You are dead right Wayne, politics was about people, who really cared about Australia and Australians.

This has become secondary, now politics is about people, who can recieve massive perks for minimal ability.IMO

Unfortunately it has become the norm, for most walks of life, the media only focuses on politicians.

The reason being, the reporters don't have to put much effort in either, to generate their income if they report on politics.

Australia is like watching "The fall of Rome", everyone has an excuse for being unable to perform, it is someone else's fault.lol


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2015)

wayneL said:


> Actually, no they don't. That's why they have the politicians they do.




It's not the fault of the people - they have no choice in the matter.

Who to vote for? It's whoever a bunch of people somewhere decided is electable; What policies is important? What issue should be raise and discuss during elections and thereafter? It's whatever is trivial and selected by the editors in collaboration with the power that be...

You want higher education for your kids? Can't afford it! Live within your means. Your dumb kid in the suburbs won't make it anyway.

You want investment in infrastructure, clean energy, innovation? First sell this, lease that, then public private partner then bail out this and all that.

You want privacy, legal rights like presume innocent? terrorist! ISIS! That Zaky kid on ABC asking question! Metadata! Fight them there so we won't fight them here (some thousands of miles away, skirted by seas and oceans and crocodiles and Queenslanders).

Protest? Marching down the streets? 
How's that mortgage going? How will you pay the bills if, say, we lock you up a couple of days, charge you with some new laws and see you in court for a while and you get fired and others are just too happy to take your place because there ain't that much job out there? Be pretty bad wouldn't it? Got rich parents who can bail you out?

But then if the situation is desperate enough, things might change.

With the coming TPP trade agreements, that might happen sooner than later.


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2015)

I watched the show a little while ago and I think Tim got owned by Tony. Also the idea that boring QANDA a few years back was its hey day is ridiculous, it was all about gay this, muslim this, boat people that, gay that.....

The contrast between venerable Liberal Paul and new Liberal Tim was weak with an obvious  pre madeup story about ABC doing wrong because of a "gotcha" moment ....give us break guys you both live of gotcha moments and faux intelligence. 

If Paul and Tim weren't groomed on their on song repertoire I'll eat my hat. It was a worse rehearsal than Wayne Swan and his budget forecasts.

The Libs really need to forget about looking for a smoking gun to bolster their polling position. Sure Australians are pretty stupid, but how stupid do they think we are?


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2015)

moXJO said:


> Here is what the ABC did wrong. They got this guy in for a pure "Gotcha" moment. Some dkhead planning the show thought it was a good idea to not only throw this in the governments face but to destroy this young man in the process. They set this up for fireworks and it blew up in their face. Oh but the ABC walk away and the guy they used well he didn't matter anyway.




So now it's the ABC's job to censor questions that might cause politicians to actually do some thinking in order to answer them ? It's a politician's job to be able to answer hard questions, not the easy ride that Bolt or Alan Jones give the Liberal pollies.

The question was relevant to a current issue. If Ciobo or any other panellist couldn't answer it, that's their problem, not the ABC's.


----------



## noco (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So now it's the ABC's job to censor questions that might cause politicians to actually do some thinking in order to answer them ? It's a politician's job to be able to answer hard questions, not the easy ride that Bolt or Alan Jones give the Liberal pollies.
> 
> The question was relevant to a current issue. If Ciobo or any other panellist couldn't answer it, that's their problem, not the ABC's.




When will we see Shorten on the Bolt Report?....He has had enough invitations....No guts..no glory....What a wimp.


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> It's not the fault of the people - they have no choice in the matter.




Pure, unadulterated, Grade A, USDA approved Bull.

Politicians are the way they are because of the way people respond to them and they're so called policies, the stupid tribalism, the voting in self interest rather than the greater good, voting on the basis of personality and so on.

The people have choices, they continuously make the wrong ones.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2015)

noco said:


> When will we see Shorten on the Bolt Report?....He has had enough invitations....No guts..no glory....What a wimp.




I'd suggest that Shorten would consider appearing on the Bolt report would be a waste of his time, as people who take any notice of Bolt would never vote for him (Shorten), as your good self has more than adequately demonstrated.


----------



## moXJO (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So now it's the ABC's job to censor questions that might cause politicians to actually do some thinking in order to answer them ? It's a politician's job to be able to answer hard questions, not the easy ride that Bolt or Alan Jones give the Liberal pollies.
> 
> The question was relevant to a current issue. If Ciobo or any other panellist couldn't answer it, that's their problem, not the ABC's.




Why use a guy with his background when it was obviously going to end badly for him. They knew exactly what they were setting up.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2015)

moXJO said:


> Why use a guy with his background when it was obviously going to end badly for him. They knew exactly what they were setting up.




So now you are saying that the ABC set Mallah up, not Ciobo ? In which case  Abbott and co should be congratulating the ABC !


----------



## moXJO (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So now you are saying that the ABC set Mallah up, not Ciobo ? In which case  Abbott and co should be congratulating the ABC !




No....
 that he was used as gutter journalism fodder to point score against the government, on a taxpayer funded, supposedly impartial program.


----------



## noco (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd suggest that Shorten would consider appearing on the Bolt report would be a waste of his time, as people who take any notice of Bolt would never vote for him (Shorten), as your good self has more than adequately demonstrated.




Well, Shorten would not get a free reign on the Bolt Report like the biased Barry Cassidy Insiders circus.

Bolt would tie him (Shorten) up in knots.

I would also like to see Shorten on the Richo/Jones show on Tuesday night.....No doubt Shorten would fear Alan Jones as well.


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd suggest that Shorten would consider appearing on the Bolt report would be a waste of his time, as people who take any notice of Bolt would never vote for him (Shorten), as your good self has more than adequately demonstrated.




And the simple truth of it. Bolt, Jones and coy cater to gossips who feel part of a community of gossips, so they are hardly likely to vote for a political party that is a core target of the vitriol. Any outsider who reads or listens to either of them do so for the curiousity ... like picking  a scab.


----------



## overhang (1 July 2015)

noco said:


> Well, Shorten would not get a free reign on the Bolt Report like the biased Barry Cassidy Insiders circus.
> 
> Bolt would tie him (Shorten) up in knots.
> 
> I would also like to see Shorten on the Richo/Jones show on Tuesday night.....No doubt Shorten would fear Alan Jones as well.




And I would like to see Abbott on Q&A which is now up to 1780 days since he was last on the show.  He will avoid the show like the plague not because of bias but because he can't handle any questions that don't allow him to use his catch phrases. Abbott makes repeated gaffs and the liberals want to keep him as far away from requiring improvisation as possible.  

There is absolutely nothing to gain by Shorten going on the Bolt report, it would be a very small minority that might watch the show with any objectivity and he would contribute to keeping this garbage on our TVs.


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2015)

moXJO said:


> No....
> that he was used as gutter journalism fodder to point score against the government, on a taxpayer funded, supposedly impartial program.





People do have a right to be bigots, you know. People have the right to say things that other people would find insulting, offensive or bigoted.


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2015)

Obviously a stacked panel that overtly favours the ALP on next week's QANDA ... but Barnaby should be able to handle it, the old hand he is. 



http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/coming_up.htm#PIERS_AKERMAN5


----------



## luutzu (1 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Pure, unadulterated, Grade A, USDA approved Bull.
> 
> Politicians are the way they are because of the way people respond to them and they're so called policies, the stupid tribalism, the voting in self interest rather than the greater good, voting on the basis of personality and so on.
> 
> The people have choices, they continuously make the wrong ones.




True that in democracies like ours, the people do have a lot of power. The people can peacefully organised and choose and make demands of the gov't. True that protests are permitted; that critics of gov't won't have their doors kicked in and taken in the night. True that if enough people marches and protests, the gov't will listen.

Take Lyndon Johnson. A Southerner... he passes his great societies law, ended segregation etc. etc.

Richard Nixon signed the Clean Air Act, created the Environmental Protection Agency.

So yes, gov't will listen if the masses organised and "choose" to do something about it.

BUT...

But those in government, those in power all know this. They know it as much as the masses does. 
Problem for the masses is, Organised Power got more resources, all their time - their job - is to make sure people know their place.

When the people are organised, those in power call it a "crisis of democracy". That the masses are considered ill-informed, ill-educated, does not know what is good for them and so should not "meddle" in affairs of state and must let "the few responsible men" and their grand strategies shape the world - for the common good of course.

[btw, all the stuff I'm saying are observations by many other much brighter people, I'm just repeating here (with one or two minor observation)]///

So... how to deal with this crisis of democracy where people demand things like clean air, peace, more investment in infrastructure and social welfare, free education so the poor can lift themselves up and out of poverty... 

In totalitarian societies, you just knock heads and break legs... in democracies, you got to be smarter and more sophisticated. Hence the appearance of "choice" and option and people power.

First, you buy off the intellectuals. Give them tenure, give them consultation and speaking fees. They will then spread the gospel.

Second. You get the "fifth estate" on your side. Want to legally merge and gain monopolies? Say something nice. Want to not be sue for defamation and just general hell? Print what we say - it's cheaper, it's more official and legitimate, it doesn't require expenditure for investigative journalism, and you don't get sue! Shareholders will be happy, and you can keep your job.

Third. Make policies that give the people instability, insecurity; put them into great financial debt where the burden will be too much for them to ask questions or attend rallies. 

I heard from, probably Chris Hedges, where during the Occupied Wall Street crackdown... the gov't know who the ring leaders were, knew exactly what they have been saying, what they have been planning and go directly to them and bring them in.

They are then charged with certain crimes, but... but the charges are not pursue at this point in time. These guys were told that if they are caught breaking it again, they will be sue and the old charges will come back. 

That is, there will be criminal records, there will be court dates costing in the tens of thousands and months of unemployment. 

With metadata, the gov't will know everything about their target. With that information, blackmail, hints of public disclosure etc. etc. They will know what button to push. 

So who's going to lead any organised movement and protests? Not when you're in a lot of debt from tuition fees, not when you could be fired, not when you may get a criminal record and the costs of legal counsel etc. etc.

----

So for the general public who, and it's only natural, got bills to pay, got life to live and family to take care of... the general public will leave the affair of states to their representative. Who just read the papers and believe in the independent and free press.

For those young and those directly affected by policies of the day, for the informed and outraged... you have other means of coercion and enticement. If that all fail, you got the militarised police.

Divide and conquer.


----------



## pixel (1 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> True that in democracies like ours, the people do have a lot of power. The people can peacefully organised and choose and make demands of the gov't. True that protests are permitted; that critics of gov't won't have their doors kicked in and taken in the night. True that if enough people marches and protests, the gov't will listen.
> [...]
> BUT...
> 
> ...




I totally agree, luutzu;
History repeats - especially if precedents are conveniently forgotten.
That's why I draw parallels between historic and present Jesuit scholars in Power.

The tenor of the propaganda may differ slightly, but the principles are exactly the same:

Control Media.
Legislate AGAINST dissent.
Suppress and personally vilify Opposition.
Paint a scary picture to justify your power grab.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 July 2015)

pixel said:


> I totally agree, luutzu;
> History repeats - especially if precedents are conveniently forgotten.
> That's why I draw parallels between historic and present Jesuit scholars in Power.
> 
> ...




Did you know that legislation will be introduced giving governments the right to GAOL whistleblowers working in detention centres, so the public will never have our consciences bruised by knowing what goes on there.


----------



## pixel (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Did you know that legislation will be introduced giving governments the right to GAOL whistleblowers working in detention centres, so the public will never have our consciences bruised by knowing what goes on there.




That too has a precedent at another time and place ...


----------



## noco (1 July 2015)

So the ABC is to have a review by the ABC with Ray Martin another one of the lefty crew....The end result under Martin will be "We could not find anything wrong with the ABC".

It will be like 12 criminals on a jury to judge another criminal....The ABC must think everybody is as stupid and  naive as they are.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...with-zaky-mallah/story-fnihmoiz-1227423825740


----------



## luutzu (1 July 2015)

pixel said:


> I totally agree, luutzu;
> History repeats - especially if precedents are conveniently forgotten.
> That's why I draw parallels between historic and present Jesuit scholars in Power.
> 
> ...




I think when the Allied marched into Berlin and after picking up the Nazi scientists and engineers, dropped by Goebbels' office and pick up his play book. Then put it to use soon after the Civil Rights movement, Vietnam and the hippies scared them into doing the right thing by the people.

It's incredible how "clean" the war on terror is. I mean, watching some news clip on the Vietnam War and you see balls of fire, napalm and dead villagers and all the carnage of war. Now the only carnage are those done by the terrorists and ours are just some distant, grainy black and white "puff".

Then there's the TPP trade agreement that seem to affect everything and everyone all around the world, and there's hardly any investigative report from the mainstream media into it.

Anyway, as Churchill said, the only difference between Democracy and other form of gov't is it can force changes in government without the bloodshed. Maybe he said that observing the two Roosevelts and so was optimistic about the future.


----------



## luutzu (1 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Did you know that legislation will be introduced giving governments the right to GAOL whistleblowers working in detention centres, so the public will never have our consciences bruised by knowing what goes on there.




Saw the trailer for Oliver Stone's "Snowden". Joined the army at 20, recruited by the CIA at 22, consultant to NSA at 26, at 29 blew the whistle on the state's illegal spying on American citizens... but was smart enough to get out first. 

So do the right thing then have to leave his family, his gf, his cushy $200K a year job, his home in Hawaii...

The guy is a true patriot and yet he have to run to Moscow and will live in exile for the rest of life.

And the masters of the universe who brought the world to economic collapse got bailed out and millions in bonuses.


Rewards and punishments are quite important incentives.


----------



## luutzu (1 July 2015)

noco said:


> So the ABC is to have a review by the ABC with Ray Martin another one of the lefty crew....The end result under Martin will be "We could not find anything wrong with the ABC".
> 
> It will be like 12 criminals on a jury to judge another criminal....The ABC must think everybody is as stupid and  naive as they are.
> 
> ...




I don't know why you're always against the left noco.

If you're on the age pension, or you visit the GP for free, or have a concession card for public transport... Where do you think those ideas came from? Capitalists? The likes of Bolt?

Haven't you read or watch any Charles Dickens stories? Not much of a paradise for the masses in those stories.


----------



## noco (1 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> I don't know why you're always against the left noco.
> 
> If you're on the age pension, or you visit the GP for free, or have a concession card for public transport... Where do you think those ideas came from? Capitalists? The likes of Bolt?
> 
> Haven't you read or watch any Charles Dickens stories? Not much of a paradise for the masses in those stories.




I have read and researched plenty about the Fabian Society...You should do the same and then perhaps you might understand what their ideology is all about.     The Green/Labor socialist call it Democratic Socialism.......central control......I wish to hell they would use the right terminology as in communism....But most of us know that would never happen because many know what a disaster communism is....The first thing they achieve is control of the media (the ABC) and that allows them to criticize and discredit a conservative government and their leader.....Control of the media makes it so much easier to control the public especially young people......The Fabians have infiltrated into schools through the training of teachers to brain wash kids on climate change.

*Labor Party Treachery
Australia’s school education contaminated by Leftist propaganda
July 27, 2014

Since the wreak-havoc Greens-Labor’s Corrosion Era of 2007-2013, Rudd and Gillard may as well still be in power across Australia.

Left Labor’s radical socialist worldview permeates Australia’s national education curricula. It continues to contaminate young Australian minds. Australian school students are being force fed socialist agenda such as:

Political Correctness
Climate Alarmism
British Invasion Theory
Globalism
Fabian Marxism
Asianisation
Multicultural Prejudice against Traditional Australians
Indebted Welfarism
Mainstreaming Sodomy
and the full suite of Greens Party Policies.


Greens Leftist politics continues to pervade Australia’s school curricula. Like Gillard-installed Mark Scott still ruling the agenda of our national broadcaster the ABC, the Leftist propaganda pervades Australian society as though Rudd-Gillard were still in power.*

*Chairman Rudd’s Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians in 2007 was characteristic of Communist Russia and Maoist China. It enforced Rudd’s central blueprint for his cultural-Left curricula. It was not Rudd’s idea but simply copy-pasted from that which Tony Blair (a Fabian) had already forced upon British schools – Climate Alarmism, Globalism, Fabian Marxism, Afro-Arab Multiculturalism and Laptop-driven Childhood Obesity.*

From my post #148...Communism : It is not dead and buried.


----------



## luutzu (1 July 2015)

noco said:


> I have read and researched plenty about the Fabian Society...You should do the same and then perhaps you might understand what their ideology is all about.     The Green/Labor socialist call it Democratic Socialism.......central control......I wish to hell they would use the right terminology as in communism....But most of us know that would never happen because many know what a disaster communism is....The first thing they achieve is control of the media (the ABC) and that allows them to criticize and discredit a conservative government and their leader.....Control of the media makes it so much easier to control the public especially young people......The Fabians have infiltrated into schools through the training of teachers to brain wash kids on climate change.
> 
> *Labor Party Treachery
> Australia’s school education contaminated by Leftist propaganda
> ...




There's only one ABC, it's under-funded, and there's Channel 7, 9, 10 and a bunch of Murdoch papers. So i'm pretty sure the odds are stacked against the "leftist lynch mob".

What's with this Communism stuff? Not even the Communist Party in China or VN are communists - not in the Socialist way you're referring to, well maybe in the way you describe and fear.

British invasion theory? What's that? The idea that Britain invade other countries instead of finding all of them uninhabited and take up the burden?

There's another "unusual" cyclone near QLD forming; QLD is having its hottest month since 1910? There's the two recent heat wave in India and Pakistan that kills around 2000 people together... Not enough to worry about if there might be a trend going on?

Globalism? Globalisation? I thought that's a capitalist thing.

Asianisation... oi! dam Chinese, coming over to Australia bringing cash and money buying inflated Australian assets they can't take home with them!

Indebted Welfarism:  I thought it's the right thing to help out those in need, help those who worked, paid their taxes and now are sick or old or need some assistant from their fellow countryman. How about corporate welfare? When corporations are bailed out, when tax rate are lowered and loophole wide open; when public assets are "sold" for next to nothing and "rights" given for nix? 


Mainstreaming Sodomy:   Refers to the "gay agenda"?


----------



## So_Cynical (2 July 2015)

noco said:


> I have read and researched plenty about the Fabian Society...You should do the same and then perhaps you might understand what their ideology is all about.     The Green/Labor socialist call it Democratic Socialism.......central control......I wish to hell they would use the right terminology as in communism....But most of us know that would never happen because many know what a disaster communism is....*The first thing they achieve is control of the media (the ABC)* and that allows them to criticize and discredit a conservative government and their leader.




The ABC has like 12 or 15% market share of the electronic media ...you need to keep taking your medication, ignore the voices and just keep taking it.


----------



## noco (2 July 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> The ABC has like 12 or 15% market share of the electronic media ...you need to keep taking your medication, ignore the voices and just keep taking it.




This a free country with free speech and I will continue to place emphasis on the ideology of the Fabian Society and their close ties with the Green/Labor socialist coalition.....There are plenty who view opinions on this forum and I am sure many take good note.

If you think you can push me off the ASF with your snide remarks and character assassination, think again.....It is typical of your type, if you don't like what is expressed by me and others on this forum, you resort to tactics of bullying....That will get you no where and it is time you sat up and took notice.

I am anti socialism (COMMUNISM) so suck it up sun shine.


----------



## Ijustnewit (2 July 2015)

I was disgusted with Anne Aly the Counter Terrorism expert on last weeks panel. She came across as a very immature individual . She constantly interrupted , made na na na noises , ya ya ya ya noises threw her hands about and basically carried on like an eight year old. Even more frightening was that she said she felt for Zaky and he was just misunderstood , mixed up and she was reaching out to him now and on previous occasions.
At times I was left thinking , anti terrorism expert ? Who's side is she on ? Again another plant by the ABC to disrupt any attempts to have a balanced discussion and someone the ABC could use to justify the previous weeks show. 
Meanwhile back at ABC News 24 lefty headquarters today , head stories lead with Climate Change heavy news.
The Barrier Reef still under danger *despite* being the all clear and Frilly Neck Lizards changing sex because of climate change . And of course the usual make me feel bad stories about starving children and the gap between rich and poor nations.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 July 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> I was disgusted with Anne Aly the Counter Terrorism expert on last weeks panel. She came across as a very immature individual . She constantly interrupted , made na na na noises , ya ya ya ya noises threw her hands about and basically carried on like an eight year old. Even more frightening was that she said she felt for Zaky and he was just misunderstood , mixed up and she was reaching out to him now and on previous occasions.
> At times I was left thinking , anti terrorism expert ? Who's side is she on ? Again another plant by the ABC to disrupt any attempts to have a balanced discussion and someone the ABC could use to justify the previous weeks show.
> Meanwhile back at ABC News 24 lefty headquarters today , head stories lead with Climate Change heavy news.
> The Barrier Reef still under danger *despite* being the all clear and Frilly Neck Lizards changing sex because of climate change . And of course the usual make me feel bad stories about starving children and the gap between rich and poor nations.




Whenever I hear the expression "whose side are you on" I go back to GeorgeDubbya's old saying "you are either for us or against us" saying ie, "accept everything I say, or you are on the terrorist side" .

That is so patently  bigoted, arrogant and conceited it's just laughable for anyone with any degree of intelligence.


----------



## dutchie (2 July 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> I was disgusted with Anne Aly the Counter Terrorism expert on last weeks panel. She came across as a very immature individual . She constantly interrupted , made na na na noises , ya ya ya ya noises threw her hands about and basically carried on like an eight year old. Even more frightening was that she said she felt for Zaky and he was just misunderstood , mixed up and she was reaching out to him now and on previous occasions.
> At times I was left thinking , anti terrorism expert ? Who's side is she on ?Again another plant by the ABC to disrupt any attempts to have a balanced discussion and someone the ABC could use to justify the previous weeks show.
> Meanwhile back at ABC News 24 lefty headquarters today , head stories lead with Climate Change heavy news.
> The Barrier Reef still under danger *despite* being the all clear and Frilly Neck Lizards changing sex because of climate change . And of course the usual make me feel bad stories about starving children and the gap between rich and poor nations.




Good post Ijustnewit.

A valid question to ask Aly. Not that it matters, considering her conduct on QandA. Who would take her seriously?


----------



## Ijustnewit (2 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Whenever I hear the expression "whose side are you on" I go back to GeorgeDubbya's old saying "you are either for us or against us" saying ie, "accept everything I say, or you are on the terrorist side" .
> 
> That is so patently  bigoted, arrogant and conceited it's just laughable for anyone with any degree of intelligence.



I'm on team Australia , if choose otherwise that's your choice


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2015)

Anne Aly's criticism of Zaky early in the show was at best guarded.



> TONY JONES: Anne Aly, because the questioner is not in the studio to ask this, I'll ask on his behalf. Let's go back to the question. Do you think the views of a man who suggested gang rape are worthwhile? Not that we knew about it at the time.
> 
> ANNE ALY: Look, I didn't know about his tweet about gang rape either and my understanding was that was a tweet that was very quickly taken down and, you know, I've seen some pretty disgusting things by a whole lot of people on Twitter and some of them directed at me and some of them directed at some people that I know as well. Not to excuse that at all, absolutely there is no excuse and so I think that had the ABC and Q&A known about that particular tweet I think that my understanding is that you probably wouldn't have had him on as you mentioned earlier, Tony. In terms of his being a convicted criminal, he's done his time. He's paid his price. We are a society that recognises that. We are a society that recognises that people who have done their time and who have the capacity to then turn around deserve a chance, and I think we should show that in all forms of public life.




By the end, she was fully excusing his behaviour.



> TONY JONES: Can I just - is it, in fact, true - I've seen it reported that you were in the process of recruiting Zaky Mallah to be part of a de-radicalisation program?
> 
> ANNE ALY: Not a de-radicalisation program. We did reach out to him through my NGO People Against Violent Extremism, because we utilise the voices of formers - both former white supremacists and former jihadists and formers from different ideological groups. We utilise their voices as a way of challenging the ideology of violent extremist groups. So, yes, we had reached out to Zaky and we will continue to reach out to Zaky and we continue to put out an invitation to Zaky to come work with us and to help him and support him in articulating his views because, you know, yeah, he’s said some ****ty stuff, okay, but he's also said some really good stuff too, and, you know, the ****ty stuff that he says it's because he's not groomed, he's not media savvy and he's not politically savvy but he could be a really strong voice and a really powerful voice. He just needs the right kind of support.




http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4246615.htm


----------



## Tisme (2 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> There's only one ABC, it's under-funded, and there's Channel 7, 9, 10 and a bunch of Murdoch papers. So i'm pretty sure the odds are stacked against the "leftist lynch mob".
> 
> What's with this Communism stuff? Not even the Communist Party in China or VN are communists - not in the Socialist way you're referring to, well maybe in the way you describe and fear.
> 
> ...




To be fair Noco's hatred of political correctness is something many of us agree with, although it does tend to be non aligned with any one particular Australian political party. It is Marxism on the social side of things, with rules made to suit the collective rather than giving over to individual freedom of mouthing off. 

Given that just everyone hates the PC foisted on us except the public service (which apparently has a majority of LNP tragics) it could be assumed the hate is a litmus test of how much socialism actually isn't embraced here.


----------



## noco (2 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> To be fair Noco's hatred of political correctness is something many of us agree with, although it does tend to be non aligned with any one particular Australian political party. It is Marxism on the social side of things, with rules made to suit the collective rather than giving over to individual freedom of mouthing off.
> 
> Given that just everyone hates the PC foisted on us except the public service (which apparently has a majority of LNP tragics) it could be assumed the hate is a litmus test of how much socialism actually isn't embraced here.




Yes, you have got that right.....Socialism actually isn't embraced here by many in the community, it is only embraced by the Green/Labor coalition.


----------



## moXJO (2 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> People do have a right to be bigots, you know. People have the right to say things that other people would find insulting, offensive or bigoted.




Yes Tisme.... I noticed.


----------



## luutzu (2 July 2015)

noco said:


> Yes, you have got that right.....Socialism actually isn't embraced here by many in the community, it is only embraced by the Green/Labor coalition.




Too much of anything isn't good.

The Communism and its regime we all loathe... what is it really? It's just simply the absolute rule of one group of people, based on the one supreme ideology that will supposedly solve all social and economic and heavenly ills - if only that one group is permitted to root out and destroy all opposing views and made itself the judge and jury of what is right and acceptable.

Replace that form of Socialism with Capitalism or anything else and you will end up with the exact same result - consolidation of wealth and power to the few; abuse of that power and authority; corruption, decay, decline to war and revolution.

Love and fidelity is good, but probably should only be applied to your spouse. To put such loyalty to one party, one ideology, one political leader or hero... chances are you will end up with a broken heart and will see certain part of your community destroyed.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Too much of anything isn't good.
> 
> The Communism and its regime we all loathe... what is it really? It's just simply the absolute rule of one group of people, based on the one supreme ideology that will supposedly solve all social and economic and heavenly ills - if only that one group is permitted to root out and destroy all opposing views and made itself the judge and jury of what is right and acceptable.
> 
> ...




Well I don't know if I agree with all that. Communism doesn't have to be Totalitarianism, you can have elected Communism. Communism is an economic principle that believes that workers should own the mean of production and that it should not be owned by a select few called shareholders. Not many people would actually vote for that idea because people are naturally greedy and want more than their fair share, so the countries that are "allegedly" Communist like China have to enforce the system by police or military.

Of course most Communist countries are totally corrupt, as the leaders get rich very quickly due to the power they have, so the pure philosophy of Communism is never applied, and the ordinary worker is just as much a slave to the State as he would be a slave to a corporation in a Capitalist country.


----------



## luutzu (2 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well I don't know if I agree with all that. Communism doesn't have to be Totalitarianism, you can have elected Communism. Communism is an economic principle that believes that workers should own the mean of production and that it should not be owned by a select few called shareholders. Not many people would actually vote for that idea because people are naturally greedy and want more than their fair share, so the countries that are "allegedly" Communist like China have to enforce the system by police or military.
> 
> Of course most Communist countries are totally corrupt, as the leaders get rich very quickly due to the power they have, so the pure philosophy of Communism is never applied, and the ordinary worker is just as much a slave to the State as he would be a slave to a corporation in a Capitalist country.




That, I think, would more appropriately be called "Marxism" or Socialism. Communism as an organised political movement as established in the USSR, China, VN... they're applied communism as preached by Lenin and calls for the necessity of a benign dictatorship.

That totalitarian and despotic rule are necessary in the struggle to implement socialism/marxism, bringing peace and equality to the world for all and then be disbanded and we all sing and dance and ladida... but until that struggle is complete, a group of enlightened philosopher comrades must rule with iron fists and destroy all imperial capitalist pigs and their piglets. haha

Well that doens't work out too well.

But it does benefit Western Capitalism in that it scares the heck out of the fat cats, and with the gilded age and unregulated capitalism wrecking society and economies... strong and intelligent leaders were permitted to implement some sort of socialism like welfare and properly regulated financial systems and trust/monopoly busting moves.

That work too well, lifts the masses out of desperation, make "capitalism" good again... and so it should be dismantled and here we are - banking collapses every few years, greater and greater inequalities...

----

Chomsky was comparing the two solutions proposed by Aristotle and James Madison at the US founding to the common problem of inequality and class warfare.

They both observed that there will always be more wealth and power in the hands of the minority of citizens. With money they gain power and influence, with influence and power they gain more money... and eventually the poor they get to just not die or something.

But people tend to want more in life than just not die... With the masses outnumbering the rich minority, how do you protect the masters of mankind from its slaves?

Aristotle proposed a sort of a welfare state - don't force the masses into desperation, fund public institution, give them hope of rising above their class, close the inequality gap, give the masses enough that they can live and enjoy life with dignity and healthy aspirations...

Madison, as Chomsky said, proposed another approach. He said, screw them... lock them up, make them desperate and afraid and insecure and weak and disorganized. Show them who's boss, literally.

Madison rules, until the crash of 1907 that ended the gilded age and Teddy bust the trusts; then the crash of 1929, rise of Nazism and Communism that saw another Roosevelt implemented regulation and the New Deal that leads to the "golden age" of capitalism and unprecedented economic growth and financial stability.

Then that kinda got lost on the new masters who thought capitalism works so well, why regulate it and weigh the rich down with all these socialism and obligation to the poor and stuff. So it was systematically remove over the past 40 years and we have some 60 million Americans living under the poverty line while the few keep breaking record prices at art and collectible auction houses.


----------



## noco (2 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well I don't know if I agree with all that. Communism doesn't have to be Totalitarianism, you can have elected Communism. Communism is an economic principle that believes that workers should own the mean of production and that it should not be owned by a select few called shareholders. Not many people would actually vote for that idea because people are naturally greedy and want more than their fair share, so the countries that are "allegedly" Communist like China have to enforce the system by police or military.
> 
> Of course most Communist countries are totally corrupt, as the leaders get rich very quickly due to the power they have, so the pure philosophy of Communism is never applied, and the ordinary worker is just as much a slave to the State as he would be a slave to a corporation in a Capitalist country.




Whilst I know this post is off the beat of the thread, the Communist system gives no incentive to be successful because everybody is considered equal...You do your allotted time at work without the responsibility as to whether the organization you work for is successful or not......You are instructed by the polite-beau to make a certain number of garments without  research as to whether that garment is suitable....whether it is salable or not. .They may do over runs or under runs and nobody really cares.

Under the capitalist system, research into sales and marketing is essential to assure that the product is salable and there is no waste....If a company is not astute enough they go broke.....There are incentives for people to work harder to receive the extra remuneration.


----------



## noco (2 July 2015)

Any body who says the ABC is not biased towards the left, may rethink their attitude, after reading the attached link, that the ABC is impartial.

I know I keep harping on it but the whole workings of the ABC was changed during the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era 2007/2013.

The best and only solution is to privatize the whole show...SELL THE DAMNED THING. 

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...as_cannot_be_fixed_warns_former_abc_chairman/

*Like me, former ABC chairman Maurice Newman is being forced to conclude that the ABC’s bias cannot be reformed and the only option is the axe - or privatisation:


    The question of public broadcasting has been thrown into the spotlight ...  from a growing perception the ABC is refusing to live up to its statutory obligations. It is judged across many genres to be partisan and invariably to the left....

    The ABC board and management reject these perceptions. Allegations of bias are met with Jesuit sophistry, moral equivalence or downright denial… That the ABC’s strongest defenders are of the Left and 40 per cent of its journalists, according to a credible 2013 survey, align with the Greens (four times the national vote) add substance to the critics’ claims. *


----------



## MrBurns (2 July 2015)

noco said:


> Any body who says the ABC is not biased towards the left, may rethink their attitude, after reading the attached link, that the ABC is impartial.
> 
> I know I keep harping on it but the whole workings of the ABC was changed during the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era 2007/2013.
> 
> ...




I don't think it's as serious as that, if we lost the ABC there wouldn't be a reason to own a TV, their programming is now more valuable than ever now that the free to air stations have reached new lows.

I'll put up with a little bias as a trade-off...a little.


----------



## noco (2 July 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I don't think it's as serious as that, if we lost the ABC there wouldn't be a reason to own a TV, their programming is now more valuable than ever now that the free to air stations have reached new lows.
> 
> I'll put up with a little bias as a trade-off...a little.




In the meantime we are allowing the ABC to be the propaganda mouth piece for the Green/Labor socialist left as it happens on QandA, Insiders, Media Watch, the 7.30 report and Late Line...Even the weekly breakfast show, that leftist Virgina Tripoli gets her 2 cents worth in where ever possible to discredit the Government.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2015)

Some belated corrections today from the ABC,



> Lateline
> 
> On Thursday, June 25, During an interview with Gerard Henderson and Jonathon Holmes, presenter Emma Alberici stated that Tony Abbott referred to Zaky Mallah as a "convicted terrorist”. Mr Abbott’s exact words were that Mallah was a “convicted criminal and terrorist sympathiser". The presenter later quoted Zaky Mallah saying on Q&A that Steve Ciobo's comments would “encourage [Australian Muslims] to join Islamic State”. Mr Mallah said that Mr Ciobo had "justified to many Australian Muslims in the community tonight to leave and go to Syria and join ISIL".




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-02/zaky-mallah/6589470

It seems though that the ABC's Media Watch from Monday this week had its interests elsewhere,

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4264050.htm


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2015)

moXJO said:


> Yes Tisme.... I noticed.




I'm glad you did because that is one of your hero's words verbatim.


----------



## noco (3 July 2015)

The board of the ABC must think everyone is blind to what they are up to.

99% of the comments on this link are critical of the ABC and now SBS is starting to appear on the same track as the ABC.

Control the media and you take control of the people....The Fabian Society at its best.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ents/the_abc_is_kidding_us_with_this_inquiry/



*When you don’t want the truth to be heard, surround yourself with people who think the same way as you and you will get the answer you want.
This may not be the answer that is needed, but it will make things look as if they have been addressed, seeming once again.
Ray Martin, the Labor supporter who will probably be given preselection to a safe seat after he delivers the report that Labor want.
Keith of Werribee (Reply)
Thu 02 Jul 15 (06:42am) *


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2015)

noco said:


> The board of the ABC must think everyone is blind to what they are up to.
> 
> 99% of the comments on this link are critical of the ABC and now SBS is starting to appear on the same track as the ABC.
> 
> ...




What bulldust. The ABC just gave the Coalition three weeks of free kicks against Labor with The Killing Season, but I never heard anyone here say that the ABC is biased against Labor.

Imagine if they did the same thing with the Turnbull-Abbott coupe. Would that be biased ?


----------



## moXJO (3 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm glad you did because that is one of your hero's words verbatim.




I thought you were subtly referring to the gay marriage thread, but there you go.


----------



## noco (3 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> What bulldust. The ABC just gave the Coalition three weeks of free kicks against Labor with The Killing Season, but I never heard anyone here say that the ABC is biased against Labor.
> 
> Imagine if they did the same thing with the Turnbull-Abbott coupe. Would that be biased ?




That 3 weeks of the ABC "Killing Season" was a rare occasion for the ABC to make it look like they were not biased but the way I saw the first episode was the ABC trying to justify Labor's big spending during the GFC....Just a bit of propaganda thrown in.

The other point I noticed was the discrediting of Bill Shorten and this could be another ploy in wedging Shorten out of the leadership of the Labor Party but was it enough to stir the fighting factions in a disunited Labor Party?...The new Rudd rules just might make it difficult to remove Shorten.


----------



## overhang (3 July 2015)

noco said:


> That 3 weeks of the ABC "Killing Season" was a rare occasion for the ABC to make it look like they were not biased but the way I saw the first episode was the ABC trying to justify Labor's big spending during the GFC....Just a bit of propaganda thrown in.




The ABC weren't trying to justify anything but pretty much outlined the facts.  The fact is we were the first country to introduce a stimulus package (that the coalition supported) and we were the only developed country to avoid a recession.  The ABC also pointed out that the policy's we spent the stimulus package on were a disaster and as Ken Henry said that we'll never know if it was the right amount or too much.

Think about your logic, we have the ABC sitting in a board room saying 'hey noco and Andrew Bolt are really onto us perhaps we need to create a documentary that will highlight what a complete shambles the Labor party were during their time in government so that we don't look biased".  This show was top quality high production TV that had the focus been on the coalition you'd be screaming bias.  It's not the ABC's job to toe the line of the coalition doctrine or the ALP for that matter, their job is to hold all governments to account and sometimes they can get it wrong like Q&A did.  Yet you seem to look up to Andrew Bolt, a journalist that supports a Jewish state but then opposes Indigenous Australians being recognised in the constitution because he believes it will divide us by race.... clear contradictions here to suit his own agenda.


----------



## noco (3 July 2015)

overhang said:


> The ABC weren't trying to justify anything but pretty much outlined the facts.  The fact is we were the first country to introduce a stimulus package (that the coalition supported) and we were the only developed country to avoid a recession.  The ABC also pointed out that the policy's we spent the stimulus package on were a disaster and as Ken Henry said that we'll never know if it was the right amount or too much.
> 
> Think about your logic, we have the ABC sitting in a board room saying 'hey noco and Andrew Bolt are really onto us perhaps we need to create a documentary that will highlight what a complete shambles the Labor party were during their time in government so that we don't look biased".  This show was top quality high production TV that had the focus been on the coalition you'd be screaming bias.  It's not the ABC's job to toe the line of the coalition doctrine or the ALP for that matter, their job is to hold all governments to account and sometimes they can get it wrong like Q&A did.  Yet you seem to look up to Andrew Bolt, a journalist that supports a Jewish state but then opposes Indigenous Australians being recognised in the constitution because he believes it will divide us by race.... clear contradictions here to suit his own agenda.




One thing you are right with and that is the Green/Labor socialist party stuffed up big time as history proves with all Labor governments, state and Federal with the exception of Hawke....Those Dudd $900 cheques now have to be paid back...they were only a Rudd loan....4 deaths in the ceiling insulation ...over 200 houses went up in smoke....dozens of companies went broke......over priced Gillard memorial school halls....massive debt and deficit...".there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead".....

The ABC IS biased towards the left wing without a shadow of a doubt so don't try to cover for them...I will not work...I hope you checked out the comments on that link.....Enough said.


----------



## luutzu (3 July 2015)

noco said:


> That 3 weeks of the ABC "Killing Season" was a rare occasion for the ABC to make it look like they were not biased but the way I saw the first episode was the ABC trying to justify Labor's big spending during the GFC....Just a bit of propaganda thrown in.....




A few economists have said that it was due that such investment/spending by Rudd that Australia didn't crash and burn the way Europe and US did. Then they got cocky and thought to tax Big Australia, mineral and carbon... 

Imagine what all those extra billions could do for Australians, particularly if it's invested in nation building projects that in turn employ more Australians.

So you could borrow for free, invest it to employ and keep people in jobs as well as have something built... na, let's just pay off the debt now because... it show fiscal discipline?


----------



## noco (4 July 2015)

More evidence on how the ABC distort the truth and even make up stories to discredit Abbott and his Ministers. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...427220411?sv=16eeec51dd64cb49c342c2c1225a90e5

 L*ATELINE ADMITS EMMA ALBERICI’S HOWLERS (SORT OF)

On Lateline on Thursday 25 June 2015, presenter Emma Alberici was all papers and smirk as she confidently quoted (i) what Tony Abbott had said earlier that day about Zaky Mallah and (ii) what Mallah himself had said on Q&A the previous Monday. The only problem was that both quotes were false.

The Lateline co-presenter’s verballing of the Prime Minister was cited in last week’s MWD — but no correction was forthcoming from the ABC. On Tuesday, after reading in The Australian’s “Cut & Paste” section that the ABC has a “Corrections and Clarifications” page on its website, Gerard Henderson asked ABC management when would the ABC correct La Alberici’s howlers. This was done yesterday morning — see MWD’s (hugely popular) “Correspondence” section today.

The good news is that the ABC management has corrected two misquotes by one of its leading presenters. The bad news is that this has only been done at the end of the Lateline transcript for 25 June and online at the “Corrections and Clarifications” page — which many people do not know exists. Tony Jones, who presented Lateline last night, made no mention on air of the important fact that his co-presenter had verballed the Prime Minister the previous week. Also Lateline has yet to put the corrections on its twitter feed.

It remains to be seen whether Emma Alberici will fess up to her invented quotes when she presents Lateline this evening. [Don’t hold your breath — MWD Ed].*

Some of these ABC presenters could not lie straight in bed if you paid them.
Now read on further for distortions.


----------



## Logique (4 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> People do have a right to be bigots, you know. People have the right to say things that other people would find insulting, offensive or bigoted.



But George Brandis isn't allowed to say that. They wanted his head when the subject was amending 18C


----------



## SirRumpole (5 July 2015)

The ideological crusade continues.

Barnaby said on Insiders that he was happy to appear of Q&A, but Abbott maintains the grudge, and is still trying to turn the ABC into his propaganda machine.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-05/barnaby-joyce-pulls-out-of-qanda-amid-ban-reports/6596576



> Q&A: Barnaby Joyce cancels appearance as PM orders frontbench boycott, spokesman says
> By Julie Doyle
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## sydboy007 (6 July 2015)

noco said:


> One thing you are right with and that is the Green/Labor socialist party stuffed up big time as history proves with all Labor governments, state and Federal with the exception of Hawke....Those Dudd $900 cheques now have to be paid back...they were only a Rudd loan....4 deaths in the ceiling insulation ...over 200 houses went up in smoke....dozens of companies went broke......over priced Gillard memorial school halls....massive debt and deficit...".there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead".....
> 
> The ABC IS biased towards the left wing without a shadow of a doubt so don't try to cover for them...I will not work...I hope you checked out the comments on that link.....Enough said.




I assume you hold barnett and newman as paragons of fiscal rectitude and economic management?

How many lives were ruined by Howard sending troops into Iraq?  Roughly 1M Australians marched in protest against sending troops, but the Govt went against the will of the people.  How many more lives will be ruined by the mission creep of Abbott?  I'd say the cost has been quite a bit higher than pink batts.  

But then, why is Labor responsible for what is a state issue in that work place safety is a state issue?  Would it be reasonable to hold Howard responsible for all the construction worker deaths and injuries due to the FHB grants he dolled out?  You know worker deaths went up while work choices was in force.





How many promises has Abott broken so far?  His NBN promise lasted less than 3 months.  How's his no new taxes, increased spending and bigger surpluses promise going too?
i agree the ABC has a left lean to it, but in a country following the right wing ideology we probably need that.  I don't hear you complaining about programs like landline, but since roughly 90% of Australians live in cities, it could be argued the ABC is biased towards farmers (for the record I find landline quite interesting)


----------



## noco (6 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> I assume you hold barnett and newman as paragons of fiscal rectitude and economic management?
> 
> How many lives were ruined by Howard sending troops into Iraq?  Roughly 1M Australians marched in protest against sending troops, but the Govt went against the will of the people.  How many more lives will be ruined by the mission creep of Abbott?  I'd say the cost has been quite a bit higher than pink batts.
> 
> ...




Firstly, I cannot speak for what is going on in WA but in Queensland Newman took over from over 10 years of hard Labor and was handed a debt of $80 billion.......In his attempt to reduce that debt, he went to the 2015 election seeking  a mandate to sell or lease assets to pay down that debt left by the Beattie/Bligh socialists left....It was rejected by  voters after the CFMEU and the Labor party after they set up their propaganda machine....Now, we in Queensland have to suffer the consequences with increasing unemployment and higher debt.

Your remarks about the Australian lives lost (43) in Iraq and the decision to send troops to Iraq was a bi-partition decision with the Labor Party....So why are you only holding the gun to Howard's head.

You keep on harping on about Abbott breaking promises but you do not criticize the Rudd/Gillard/ Rudd and I will include Swan ( the worlds greatest treasurer ???) who promised we would be in the black in 2013...500 times they stated it...Then it became a deficit of $2 billion, the $11 billion, then $18 billion but the true figure was $48 billion.....Labor lied about the state of the economy and Abbott had no alternative but break some of his promises.

But ha, according to the polls, Abbott is doing a great job and Billy boy is sliding south.


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The ideological crusade continues.
> 
> Barnaby said on Insiders that he was happy to appear of Q&A, but Abbott maintains the grudge, and is still trying to turn the ABC into his propaganda machine.




I disagree. I don't see any ideological crusade. What I see from my vantage point, is an opportunity to divide the community into tribal hysteria, with political gain. This is classical Tony Abbott the destroyer, with his divide and conquer mentality. It distracts the public from the can't do governance.

The ABC has way too much intellectual prowess for the likes of Barnaby, Tony, and the others who haven't the ability and a belief that moribund parliamentary esprit de corps is an asset. I would imagine Tony Jones would have pursued Barnaby on the logical reasons for not allowing the public to view the enemy at the gates.


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2015)

noco said:


> Firstly, I cannot speak for what is going on in WA but in Queensland Newman took over from over 10 years of hard Labor and was handed a debt of $80 billion.......In his attempt to reduce that debt, he went to the 2015 election seeking  a mandate to sell or lease assets to pay down that debt left by the Beattie/Bligh socialists left....It was rejected by  voters after the CFMEU and the Labor party after they set up their propaganda machine....Now, we in Queensland have to suffer the consequences with increasing unemployment and higher debt.
> 
> Your remarks about the Australian lives lost (43) in Iraq and the decision to send troops to Iraq was a bi-partition decision with the Labor Party....So why are you only holding the gun to Howard's head.
> 
> ...




Newman was a shoe in to be re-elected, he promised lots and lined the pockets of the few, Abbott has broken his pledges which were cynical in the first place. Forget the party loyal, the score cards speak for themselves... in any corner of the paddock and either side of the fence.


----------



## noco (6 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> Newman was a shoe in to be re-elected, he promised lots and lined the pockets of the few, Abbott has broken his pledges which were cynical in the first place. Forget the party loyal, the score cards speak for themselves... in any corner of the paddock and either side of the fence.




Do you have a link on your claim or is it all hearsay again?


----------



## Tisme (6 July 2015)

noco said:


> Do you have a link on your claim or is it all hearsay again?




No I don't post links because they are superfluous to welded on fanatics. I don't perpetuate hearsay, I tend to act on fact and plausible fiction.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> I disagree. I don't see any ideological crusade. What I see from my vantage point, is an opportunity to divide the community into tribal hysteria, with political gain. This is classical Tony Abbott the destroyer, with his divide and conquer mentality. It distracts the public from the can't do governance.
> 
> The ABC has way too much intellectual prowess for the likes of Barnaby, Tony, and the others who haven't the ability and a belief that moribund parliamentary esprit de corps is an asset. I would imagine Tony Jones would have pursued Barnaby on the logical reasons for not allowing the public to view the enemy at the gates.




There are definitely people in the Liberal Party who don't think that the ABC should exist at all and should be sold off to Uncle Rupie. Cory Bernadi is one of those. The IPA thinks so too and Tony Abbott listens to the IPA.


----------



## sptrawler (6 July 2015)

Well at least with Abbott banning front benchers going on Q & A, Tony Jones will have to do some real reporting, rather than just Government bashing.

All we need now, is the same ban being applied to the Bolt report, another one eyed nonsense programme.


----------



## noco (6 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Well at least with Abbott banning front benchers going on Q & A, Tony Jones will have to do some real reporting, rather than just Government bashing.
> 
> All we need now, is the same ban being applied to the Bolt report, another one eyed nonsense programme.




Mr Srooge (Tony Jones) always has that "GOTCHA" mentality...He must work out long before the show as tho how he can trap a coalition MP.

Regarding the Bolt report, I have noted Bolt being critical of Abbott more than once.

The difference between the two shows are the fact that the ABC is funded by the tax payer and has a charter of impartiality which it completely ignores where as the Bolt Report is a free enterprise organization and is not under any obligation  to follow a tax payer funded charter......If the channel Bolt works for loses its ratings and is ostracized by their advertising clients, they go out of business.....The ABC does not have to worry about ratings or advertising....This why the Labor Party have planted so many socialists in the ABC.

Control the media and you control the naive people.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 July 2015)

noco said:


> Mr Srooge (Tony Jones) always has that "GOTCHA" mentality...He must work out long before the show as tho how he can trap a coalition MP.
> 
> Regarding the Bolt report, I have noted Bolt being critical of Abbott more than once.
> 
> ...




The problem is that when the ABC carries out its charter and criticises  the government  there are calls for heads to roll. If you want an impartial ABC then there has to be freedom from harassment by those holding the purse strings.


----------



## noco (6 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The problem is that when the ABC carries out its charter and criticises  the government  there are calls for heads to roll. If you want an impartial ABC then there has to be freedom from harassment by those holding the purse strings.




It is very obvious to me and many others who comment on media reports from the ABC that they, the ABC, jump on and exploit and many cases exaggerate any minor slip of the tongue by Abbott or his MPs where as if their is a gaff by any Labor Shorten or his  MPs, the ABC let them go throw to the keeper with very little mention.

You have to admit the ABC are so blatantly obvious when it comes to discrediting the Liberal National Party...They will go out of their way to twist things around to make it out worse than what it really is...It is not just a case of accountability, it is more a matter of humiliation when they see an opportunity..


----------



## Tisme (7 July 2015)

When another member here and myself were part of the now defunct QANDA discussion board, we both were very critical of various aspect to the show. I got fed up with the persistent, if not constant, ambushing of my time with long winded and deliberate debates about homosexuality, muslims, boat people and climate change. To me it was sledgehammering an agenda of something, not so much political, nor social, but something else. Sufficed to say the overly moderated forum started stripping entire pages of member arguments.

It's only my opinion, but I don't think QANDA is political in the sense of  registered parties. Given the undemocratic behaviour of the administrators on the QANDA discussion board, I tend to think the show is crafted to create dissention amongst peers and viewers can feel aggrieved for their side of the fence. I'm pretty sure all party tragics get pent up over the unfair treatment their tribes gets at the hands of Tony Jones.

We have to come to terms with what makes a Liberal and what makes a Laborite. One of the major differences is that Labor hacks invariably like to talk things out, they pursue facts to support their argument and they will get passionate. Liberals don't like to explain because it is tantamount to justifying and therefore a slight on ones character.... they just want to throw spears at problems, whereas Laborites want to get to the core of the problem and negotiate an outcome.....just like public servants, just like the ABC.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2015)

I saw dear old Mandy Vanstone on ABC Breakfast this morning saying that she never got a fair go on Q&A. She probably got more than she deserved, however I would like to see the rationale that the ABC uses to decide what questions should be asked. There must be some sort of selection procedure. Perhaps the questions should be put into a barrel and drawn out by one of the panellists during the show, but even then some people would complain than the barrel was stacked.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2015)

> We have to come to terms with what makes a Liberal and what makes a Laborite. One of the major differences is that Labor hacks invariably like to talk things out, they pursue facts to support their argument and they will get passionate. Liberals don't like to explain because it is tantamount to justifying and therefore a slight on ones character.... they just want to throw spears at problems, whereas Laborites want to get to the core of the problem and negotiate an outcome.....just like public servants, just like the ABC.




So when the Q&A forum introduced a restricted word count on submissions, that was blatantly biased towards the Conservatives


----------



## chiff (7 July 2015)

I wonder whether the Abbott ban on QandA  came after Barnaby asserted that same sex marriage was not a good idea because it did not fit in with the views of our Asian neighbours.Questioners would have had a field day with that one.
I believe that Malcolm Turnbull could respond intelligently to these questions,but I worry about some of the other frontbenchers.


----------



## dutchie (7 July 2015)

We have to come to terms with what makes a Liberal and what makes a Laborite. One of the major differences is that Liberal hacks invariably like to talk things out, they pursue facts to support their argument and they will get passionate. Laborites don't like to explain because it is tantamount to justifying and therefore a slight on ones character.... they just want to throw spears at problems, whereas Liberals want to get to the core of the problem and negotiate an outcome....unlike public servants, unlike the ABC.


----------



## Tisme (7 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I saw dear old Mandy Vanstone on ABC Breakfast this morning saying that she never got a fair go on Q&A. She probably got more than she deserved, however I would like to see the rationale that the ABC uses to decide what questions should be asked. There must be some sort of selection procedure. Perhaps the questions should be put into a barrel and drawn out by one of the panellists during the show, but even then some people would complain than the barrel was stacked.




None of our fricken questions ever got selected and we were core members. 

I can't believe they would pass up the opportunity to discuss the topics we started. Instead they shutdown the thread starter function and limited discussions to retrospective questions of the night. That's democracy in action right there ....LNP style


----------



## Logique (7 July 2015)

I agree with the _Q&A_ ban, and it should be extended further to _7:30_ and _Lateline_. 

Until such time as Bill Shorten appears on the _Bolt Report_, which Rudd and Gillard never did.  

And the national broadcaster meets it's public charter.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2015)

Logique said:


> I agree with the _Q&A_ ban, and it should be extended further to _7:30_ and _Lateline_.
> 
> Until such time as Bill Shorten appears on the _Bolt Report_, which Rudd and Gillard never did.
> 
> And the national broadcaster meets it's public charter.




As a notional Labor supporter I completely agree with you. The less I see of the Liberal/National Party on my TV screens the better I like it. If the LNP bans the ABC forever I'll be mighty grateful to them.


----------



## Tisme (7 July 2015)

Logique said:


> I agree with the _Q&A_ ban, and it should be extended further to _7:30_ and _Lateline_.
> 
> Until such time as Bill Shorten appears on the _Bolt Report_, which Rudd and Gillard never did.
> 
> And the national broadcaster meets it's public charter.




I doubt the LNP will change their mind based on Bill Shorten's adventures.  The real reason for the indignation and ban is so the gay marriage debate can be starved of oxygen ..  QANDA was just a convenient moment that filled a need.  Malcolm will know this and break ranks because he carries a torch for homosexuals, for reasons of his own.


----------



## noco (7 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> As a notional Labor supporter I completely agree with you. The less I see of the Liberal/National Party on my TV screens the better I like it. If the LNP bans the ABC forever I'll be mighty grateful to them.




Do I detect bigotry here?.....Correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2015)

noco said:


> Do I detect bigotry here?.....Correct me if I am wrong.




No, just a personal preference based on the evidence that they rarely say anything that I agree with.


----------



## awg (7 July 2015)

I watch a bit of ABC, and do think that many of the presenters lean to the left wing, probably many production staff as well. As I am of left-wing persuasion (but shockingly right-wing to some) this doesnt bother me too much.

Today I hear newly on ABC radio, Sarrah Le Marquand, also a journalist of Daily Telegraph, a paper I used to read, but gave up, as it was so Rupert biased rabid right wing, that it wasnt a newspaper anymore.

I am not familiar with her work, but doubt she would have been at the Tele, if she had a left-wing bone in her body

So maybe the ABC is immediately looking for some token "right-wingers" they can get on-air to counter the imbalance?


----------



## SirRumpole (7 July 2015)

awg said:


> I watch a bit of ABC, and do think that many of the presenters lean to the left wing, probably many production staff as well. As I am of left-wing persuasion (but shockingly right-wing to some) this doesnt bother me too much.
> 
> Today I hear newly on ABC radio, Sarrah Le Marquand, also a journalist of Daily Telegraph, a paper I used to read, but gave up, as it was so Rupert biased rabid right wing, that it wasnt a newspaper anymore.
> 
> ...




Chris Ulhmann is already there.


----------



## drsmith (7 July 2015)

I see Ray Martin who is to conduct an independent audit of Q&A has entered the political fray. I also note the audit has already reached a conclusion.



> As well as decrying the government's Q&A boycott as "silly", Martin said he believes Q&A host Tony Jones was as tough on the previous Labor government as the Coalition.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...otts-silly-frontbench-boycott-20150707-gi6lal

Malcolm Turnbull should therefore be fine attending next week.


----------



## orr (7 July 2015)

drsmith said:


> \
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull should therefore be fine attending next week.




Barnaby Joyce 'soft as $hite'.  So I spose we'll see about Malcolm.
T Abbott ever likey to appear? I spose that makes him as hard as? Well......considerably softer than Barnaby.


----------



## luutzu (8 July 2015)

orr said:


> Barnaby Joyce 'soft as $hite'.  So I spose we'll see about Malcolm.
> T Abbott ever likey to appear? I spose that makes him as hard as? Well......considerably softer than Barnaby.




Is it just me or Turnbull looks to be the next PM?


----------



## Tink (8 July 2015)

Agree, Logique, with Q and A.

This has been going on for a long time, and I am glad that they are taking a stand.

Having a panel stacked with one side is boring to watch, it just turns out pushing their own propaganda.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 July 2015)

drsmith said:


> I see Ray Martin who is to conduct an independent audit of Q&A has entered the political fray. I also note the audit has already reached a conclusion.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...otts-silly-frontbench-boycott-20150707-gi6lal





Ray Martin is not the brightest star in the sky. I wouldn't trust him to go to Woolies to get me a packet of smokes.

His comments prejudge the Inquiry outcome, and disqualify him.

What a muppet.

gg


----------



## Tisme (8 July 2015)

luutzu said:


> Is it just me or Turnbull looks to be the next PM?




I think we all know he could be if he hadn't lost his bravado after being tossed from the job as leader. He just shadow boxes these days and is inconsequential to Tony and his circle of trust.


----------



## chiff (8 July 2015)

Tony Windsor tweeted that the Q and A ban was about stopping Turnbull appearing.


----------



## Tisme (8 July 2015)

At the risk of this being used as a cross threader, by the gays on the forum, I think we should be glad the ABC have seen fit to allow us access to some of the archives:

http://splash.abc.net.au/home#!/media/29070/family-life-in-the-1960s

and I think one of the venues in Brisbane actually did succumb to this:

http://splash.abc.net.au/home#!/media/522277/the-stomp-a-1960s-dance-craze


----------



## Tisme (8 July 2015)

chiff said:


> Tony Windsor tweeted that the Q and A ban was about stopping Turnbull appearing.




Yes it is part of the ban on discussing Gay marriage which Turnbull is a great proponent of; one reason being is that it wounds Tony to know one of his team supports his sister's agenda.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

Tink said:


> Agree, Logique, with Q and A.
> 
> This has been going on for a long time, and I am glad that they are taking a stand.
> 
> Having a panel stacked with one side is boring to watch, it just turns out pushing their own propaganda.




Tink, I have been harping on this subject for so long but I constantly get howled down by the Socialist Left on the ASF...I have been called all sorts of names and I have experienced more than one attempt of Character assassination which is all part of their play. 

It is all a part of the Fabian Society strategy to gain the upper hand on the naive people who believe their propaganda which is central control.....They will push their barrow on Global  Warming or Climate Change depending on the weather at the time, Gay Marriage, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer to the push where we Australian should share the wealth of what comes out of the mining industry....We are already sharing that wealth in taxation  and royalties.....The Fabian Society's (communism) first endeavor is to control the media and  they have done it very successfully with the ABC along with the Fairfax group. They will then go on to control the Banks, Mining, manufacturing and agriculture if they ever get into power again.

They keep chipping away with their propaganda to discredit a conservative government, its leader and his ministers as has been well demonstrated  over the past year or two.

The ABC staff consist of some 42% who are Green sympathizers and some 38% left wing Labor....It was well orchestrated during the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era 2007/2013 and Gillard installed the left wing Mark Scott and many left wingers during that time.

Gillard is still a member of the Fabian Society along with Jenny Macklin, Chris Bowen and Tony Burke....Gillard confessed to being a communist...The late Gough Whitlam was their Patron...Lee Rihanan of the Greens Party is a well known communist.

GETUP is another propaganda machine for the Green/Labor socialist with Bill Shorten a foundation member and a past board member...The unions recently donated $1 million to GETUP.

So we have a pattern here of all the ABC programs including Insiders, QandA, 7.30 report, Late Line, The Drum Media Watch and Virginia Tripoloi on the ABC breakfast show each week day broadcasting their socialist propaganda.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 July 2015)

I notice that people here have not expressed appreciation of the grilling that Tony Jones gave Richard Marles on Q&A regarding Labor's turnback policy.

Of course, had TJ given such a grilling to a Liberal MP it would be bias, but in this case it was just a journalist doing his job.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I notice that people here have not expressed appreciation of the grilling that Tony Jones gave Richard Marles on Q&A regarding Labor's turnback policy.
> 
> Of course, had TJ given such a grilling to a Liberal MP it would be bias, but in this case it was just a journalist doing his job.




That was a very rare occasion to make the ABC look good......Like one against Labor and 99 against the Liberals.

The ABC must really think we are all fools to fall for their pranks.


----------



## sydboy007 (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> That was a very rare occasion to make the ABC look good......Like one against Labor and 99 against the Liberals.
> 
> The ABC must really think we are all fools to fall for their pranks.




But when murdoch sky news scores a king hit no one complains

[video=youtube_share;EbtgULCY5zk]http://youtu.be/EbtgULCY5zk[/video]

Could it be most of the liberal front bench just don't know enough about their portfolios to front up to anyone but Alan Jones and sound even a tad competent?

Kevin Andrews as Defence Minister.  Susan Lay as minister for Health and Sports.  Peter Dutton as minister for Immigration.  Andrew Robb as minister of Trade.  Joe Hockey as Treasurer.

I'd be leary of Dutton in charge of a CWA bake sale, and Lay might as well just reprint what the corporate sector sprouts about health issues.  Robb is a mouthpiece for large US corporations.


----------



## Logique (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> ....The Fabian Society's (communism) first endeavor is to control the media and  they have done it very successfully with the ABC along with the Fairfax group. They will then go on to control the Banks, Mining, manufacturing and agriculture if they ever get into power again...



Don't forget the infiltration of the schools Noco.  I wonder if it's possible any more to get a pass in school if a kid says global warming is just a theory, or gays shouldn't get married.

Ray Martin?  May as well close down the inquiry, Ray has already reached his conclusions. We're all just being silly and crazy, and Tony Jones probably didn't do anything wrong.  Fierce independence from Ray.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

Logique said:


> Don't forget the infiltration of the schools Noco.  I wonder if it's possible any more to get a pass in school if a kid says global warming is just a theory, or gays shouldn't get married.
> 
> Ray Martin?  May as well close down the inquiry, Ray has already reached his conclusions. We're all just being silly and crazy, and Tony Jones probably didn't do anything wrong.  Fierce independence from Ray.




Yes, that was all a part of Gillards education revolution starting with converting the young teachers at uni and then in turn brain washing the kids with Global warming and lots of other socialist crap.


----------



## sydboy007 (8 July 2015)

Logique said:


> Don't forget the infiltration of the schools Noco.  I wonder if it's possible any more to get a pass in school if a kid says global warming is just a theory, or gays shouldn't get married.
> 
> Ray Martin?  May as well close down the inquiry, Ray has already reached his conclusions. We're all just being silly and crazy, and Tony Jones probably didn't do anything wrong.  Fierce independence from Ray.




Come up with a well researched argument and provide a logical process to base you argument on and I'd say there's a good chance you'd get marked accordingly.

Not backing up your argument with research would get marked accordingly as well.


----------



## overhang (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> Tink, I have been harping on this subject for so long but I constantly get howled down by the Socialist Left on the ASF...I have been called all sorts of names and I have experienced more than one attempt of Character assassination which is all part of their play.




Noco I don't think you deserve to be personally attacked but you do seem to provoke by your continual use of "socialist, communist, fabian" to describe those that lean to the left of you.  The context you use these words in gives a very negative connotation.  If I went around describing every Queenslander as a redneck I wouldn't expect a warm reception from Queenslanders as most aren't rednecks.  And the same can be said about the whole climate debate, if I wanted to engage in a civil discussion with someone on climate I wouldn't call those I disagree with as either a warmist or a denier and expect to a positive discussion to take place.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Come up with a well researched argument and provide a logical process to base you argument on and I'd say there's a good chance you'd get marked accordingly.
> 
> Not backing up your argument with research would get marked accordingly as well.




from my post # 148 Communism : It is not dead and buried.

ttp://australiafirstparty.net/austr...st-propaganda/

Labor Party Treachery
Australia’s school education contaminated by Leftist propaganda
July 27, 2014

Since the wreak-havoc Greens-Labor’s Corrosion Era of 2007-2013, Rudd and Gillard may as well still be in power across Australia.

Left Labor’s radical socialist worldview permeates Australia’s national education curricula. It continues to contaminate young Australian minds. Australian school students are being force fed socialist agenda such as:

Political Correctness
Climate Alarmism
British Invasion Theory
Globalism
Fabian Marxism
Asianisation
Multicultural Prejudice against Traditional Australians
Indebted Welfarism
Mainstreaming Sodomy
and the full suite of Greens Party Policies.


Greens Leftist politics continues to pervade Australia’s school curricula. Like Gillard-installed Mark Scott still ruling the agenda of our national broadcaster the ABC, the Leftist propaganda pervades Australian society as though Rudd-Gillard were still in power.

The Green/Labor socialist's (communism) ideology is first take control of the media to promote and poison the minds of young people and the Green/Labor party were well and truly intrenched in the "EDUCATION REVOLUTION".

Chairman Rudd’s Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians in 2007 was characteristic of Communist Russia and Maoist China. It enforced Rudd’s central blueprint for his cultural-Left curricula. It was not Rudd’s idea but simply copy-pasted from that which Tony Blair (a Fabian) had already forced upon British schools – Climate Alarmism, Globalism, Fabian Marxism, Afro-Arab Multiculturalism and Laptop-driven Childhood Obesity.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> from my post # 148 Communism : It is not dead and buried.
> 
> ttp://australiafirstparty.net/austr...st-propaganda/
> 
> ...




Looney Right Wing drivel.


----------



## dutchie (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Looney Right Wing drivel.




Well debated Sir!


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

dutchie said:


> Well debated Sir!




Yes, dutchie that is what I have come to expect when these fellows don't like the truth it is called "DRIVEL".....although they know it is true, they just don't want to accept it and furthermore they just don't have a counter for it, so as you say it was well debated.


----------



## sydboy007 (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> Yes, dutchie that is what I have come to expect when these fellows don't like the truth it is called "DRIVEL".....although they know it is true, they just don't want to accept it and furthermore they just don't have a counter for it, so as you say it was well debated.




Can you provide some credible proof for your previous post

I'd like to see where the fabian socialist green agenda is based in the official school curriculum.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Can you provide some credible proof for your previous post
> 
> I'd like to see where the fabian socialist green agenda is based in the official school curriculum.




That is one of the secrets the Fabians use......Never expose the truth......do it without people realizing it.

http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard/

*The Fabianists believe in achieving their aims by stealth. They were opposed to the violent revolutions in Russia and China. Instead, they prefer to infiltrate into positions of power and then go about implementing their socialist agenda step by step. They operate so stealthily and operate so slowly, chipping away at the very fabric of society little by little, that most people don’t even notice they have lost their freedom until it is too late. At the same time, the Fabianists are extremely skilled at manipulating public opinion using emotive causes that sound so attractive that most people miss the sinister purpose behind them.*

*Ever since Gough Whitlam took power, we have seen the Fabian fingerprint on everything successive Labor governments have done. It’s not just that they spend all the money so carefully built up by their opponents the LNP or its predecessors whenever they are in power. The Laborites have made sweeping changes to the social fabric of our country, whittled away little by little at our freedoms, and pushed us ever closer to the communist ideal of collectivism.

As well, we have been disarmed, a key element in the Fabian agenda. An unarmed citizenry is unable to face the overwhelming force at the disposal of a Fabian-led government. So far, they have not had to implement force against us. Over the decades they have perfected ways to strip our rights and subjugate us, until we have a population so used to being told how to behave and what to do that our citizens willingly accept the impositions a free people would never submit to.*


----------



## SirRumpole (8 July 2015)

noco said:


> So far, they have not had to implement force against us. Over the decades they have perfected ways to strip our rights and subjugate us, until we have a population so used to being told how to behave and what to do that our citizens willingly accept the impositions a free people would never submit to.[/B]




Indeed like repressive metadata and anti whistleblower legislation bought in by YOUR party, and stupidly supported by Labor. Your hated enemies the Lefty Greens were the only ones to speak up against these repressive laws. What does that say about the politics of repression ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed like repressive metadata and anti whistleblower legislation bought in by YOUR party, and stupidly supported by Labor. Your hated enemies the Lefty Greens were the only ones to speak up against these repressive laws. What does that say about the politics of repression ?




Mate,

It all comes down to money, in the end. 

I could not give a rats what sort of left wing drivel the ABC dishes out to the partially educated, UNLESS I HAPPEN TO BE PAYING FOR IT WITH MY TAXES. 

Please excuse. 

I rarely shout on ASF. 

But that is the nub.

I pay and don't agree with the content. 

I also don't agree with Andrew Bolt but at least get the pleasure of a 16% turnaround profit in the share price of TEN regularly when trading.

gg


----------



## explod (8 July 2015)

Agree GG. Money runs it and the polly's of all sides, particularly the right who are built on expansionism and private media to keep the sheeple ill informed. The unions try to uphold conditions for those struggling to hold thier homes and families together.

Tough times are apon us on the streets and developments on the global scale as we speak is going to take more than the focus on Jihad to be in this game.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 July 2015)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mate,
> 
> It all comes down to money, in the end.
> 
> ...




Yes, well GG, as I've said before your own perceptions of bias are coloured by your own bias. If you are already on the Right, then someone in the centre appears Left, whereas to an actual Fabian the ABC probably appears Right Wing. The ABC will never please everyone, but that's not it's job.

If people want something for themselves out of the political system, I suggest they keep bribing, sorry donating to political parties.

PS Did anyone actually watch Q&A on Monday ? Greg Sheridan did a great impression of a Fabian !!!


----------



## explod (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, well GG, as I've said before your own perceptions of bias are coloured by your own bias. If you are already on the Right, then someone in the centre appears Left, whereas to an actual Fabian the ABC probably appears Right Wing. The ABC will never please everyone, but that's not it's job.
> 
> If people want something for themselves out of the political system, I suggest they keep bribing, sorry donating to political parties.
> 
> PS Did anyone actually watch Q&A on Monday ? Greg Sheridan did a great impression of a Fabian !!!




Well put.


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2015)

explod said:


> Agree GG. The unions try to uphold conditions for those struggling to hold thier homes and families together.




I hope you didn't choke on you weeties, when you wrote that.

Craig Thomson sends his love.lol


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, well GG, as I've said before your own perceptions of bias are coloured by your own bias. If you are already on the Right, then someone in the centre appears Left, whereas to an actual Fabian the ABC probably appears Right Wing. The ABC will never please everyone, but that's not it's job.
> 
> If people want something for themselves out of the political system, I suggest they keep bribing, sorry donating to political parties.




Is that, as opposed to extorting donations, or misappropriating funds?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, well GG, as I've said before your own perceptions of bias are coloured by your own bias. If you are already on the Right, then someone in the centre appears Left, whereas to an actual Fabian the ABC probably appears Right Wing. The ABC will never please everyone, but that's not it's job.
> 
> If people want something for themselves out of the political system, I suggest they keep bribing, sorry donating to political parties.
> 
> PS Did anyone actually watch Q&A on Monday ? Greg Sheridan did a great impression of a Fabian !!!




Reasonable points, SirR, however your first paragraph needs to be addressed to the ABC Chairman, MD and Board. 

As to your second paragraph, I do not subscribe to the Eddie Obeid School. Nor to the Calabrian Mafia School.

I no longer watch Qanda as it gives me a headache, and I find scrolling through ASF much better therapy than Qanda of a Monday night.

As to Greg Sheridan, it is interesting that you mistook him for a Fabian, as his ideas are those of probably the greatest thinker in Australian history, Bob Santamaria. 

Santamaria was a person with soul, hardly a socialist. And nor is Greg.

gg


----------



## sydboy007 (8 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Is that, as opposed to extorting donations, or misappropriating funds?




What about the Abbott slush fund? He lied to the AEC about it.  He disregarded some serious laws, but I suppose telling us there's an ISIS under the beds is his way of deflection.

Be great if the media gave it a tenth of the attention they do to kim kardashian's latest butt pose, but I suppose if the ABC had actually done some investigative reporting on it that would be considered left wing bias.

https://newmatilda.com/2012/12/11/how-abbott-funded-fight-against-one-nation


----------



## explod (8 July 2015)

Remeber well the rants of Santamaria.  Now it is Andrew Bolt.

The blessed Cross hangs the duped so well.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 July 2015)

explod said:


> Remeber well the rants of Santamaria.  Now it is Andrew Bolt.
> 
> The blessed Cross hangs the duped so well.




Yes I seem to remember a TV show called "Point of View" with BA when I was a kid. Didn't understand most of it then, and still don't.


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> What about the Abbott slush fund? He lied to the AEC about it.  He disregarded some serious laws, but I suppose telling us there's an ISIS under the beds is his way of deflection.
> 
> Be great if the media gave it a tenth of the attention they do to kim kardashian's latest butt pose, but I suppose if the ABC had actually done some investigative reporting on it that would be considered left wing bias.
> 
> https://newmatilda.com/2012/12/11/how-abbott-funded-fight-against-one-nation




I think it would be great, if you gave a tenth of your attention to the labor Party, that you give to Abbott.

But then again, you wouldn't have anything to write.lol


----------



## sydboy007 (8 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I think it would be great, if you gave a tenth of your attention to the labor Party, that you give to Abbott.
> 
> But then again, you wouldn't have anything to write.lol




Well, Abbott's in power and the Govt is selling us out.

Seen the latest with Hunt now giving the Chinese a bit of early payout on the FTA?  Who in their right mine gives the go ahead for a coal mine in some of the best farming land in Australia? Why would you OK a new coal mine when half the ones already in operation are losing money?  Seriously, why would you OK further increases into production into a market that is already oversupplied? 

The rate this Govt is going we'll have to move to develop the North because there wont be anything south of the QLD border worth growing on.

I can't believe I'm on the side of Joyce and Jones on this, but for once their arguments hold up.


----------



## noco (8 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Looney Right Wing drivel.




Rumpy, if the truth hurts, break glass and hit the red drivel button...It helps to take away the pain..


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 July 2015)

Just for clarification, as the thread as is it's wont, deflects to ignorance.

I hold Mrs Tony Jones, Mrs Bolt, Mrs Richardson and Miss Alan Jones in equal opprobrium. 

All are likely lads elevated to wealth and influence by the gods. 

None could compare with Bob Santamaria, of who many have heard, but not listened. 

He advocated a Singapore type compulsory savings, tied to home ownership and family benefits, long before it became fashionable. His social and political philosophy if adopted would have benefited Australia immensely.

Google him and read some of his thoughts and you will be enlightened.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (8 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Well, Abbott's in power and the Govt is selling us out.
> 
> Seen the latest with Hunt now giving the Chinese a bit of early payout on the FTA?  Who in their right mine gives the go ahead for a coal mine in some of the best farming land in Australia? Why would you OK a new coal mine when half the ones already in operation are losing money?  Seriously, why would you OK further increases into production into a market that is already oversupplied?
> 
> ...




A coal mine, even if it is a bloody massive one, will only cover a small footprint, relative to a region. So let's not get over the top with painting a picture.

Secondly, the loonie left Labor and Greens, have made it glaringly obvious, that they won't sell our coal or give access to it.

So if the Chinese want to buy it, why not get some money for it? We've said we don't want it.

Look at it like an old HQ Holden your mum ownes, it doesn't run on unleaded and pollutes a lot.

Someone wants to buy it, but you say no mum leave it in the shed, and get a loan to pay your debts.

Meanwhile Labor and the Greens tell your mum, to crush it and send it to the tip, then get a loan.

Actually it reminds me of how lots of people think, maybe that's why we are in the situation we find ourselves.lol


----------



## Tink (9 July 2015)

Logique said:


> Don't forget the infiltration of the schools Noco.  I wonder if it's possible any more to get a pass in school if a kid says global warming is just a theory, or gays shouldn't get married.
> 
> Ray Martin?  May as well close down the inquiry, Ray has already reached his conclusions. We're all just being silly and crazy, and Tony Jones probably didn't do anything wrong.  Fierce independence from Ray.




+1, agree, Logique, and noco.

Brainwashing our children in our public schools and universities, and dismantling our history.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> A coal mine, even if it is a bloody massive one, will only cover a small footprint, relative to a region. So let's not get over the top with painting a picture.
> 
> l




Barnaby Joyce doesn't agree.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...enhua-coal-mine-approval-20150708-gi7yh8.html


----------



## SirRumpole (9 July 2015)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just for clarification, as the thread as is it's wont, deflects to ignorance.
> 
> I hold Mrs Tony Jones, Mrs Bolt, Mrs Richardson and Miss Alan Jones in equal opprobrium.
> 
> ...





So who would you say is his modern equivalent in politics ?

Malcolm Turnbull ?


----------



## noco (9 July 2015)

Ray Martin investigating the ABC is like the police investigating the police.......Martin has already made up his mind before  the inquiry even begins so he should resign.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._resigned_yet_from_this_farcical_abc_inquiry/


----------



## SirRumpole (9 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So who would you say is his modern equivalent in politics ?
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull ?




Ah I just found that BA hated the ABC, so I can see why some here are so fond of him


----------



## chiff (9 July 2015)

Noco ...I see you have listed what someone else sees as a socialist agenda.
I think that we should get your thoughts on all of these points-not just slogans.
I would like to know your views on the compatibility of the two ideas -political correctness and respectful behaviour?
I am sure that you have thought about these things,and I am sure that you would like to lift the standard of debate.
After that we will go onto the next point on the list.


----------



## sydboy007 (9 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> A coal mine, even if it is a bloody massive one, will only cover a small footprint, relative to a region. So let's not get over the top with painting a picture.
> 
> Secondly, the loonie left Labor and Greens, have made it glaringly obvious, that they won't sell our coal or give access to it.
> 
> ...




It's the water table dear sp.  Do a bit of research on the issue and then come back with your thoughts.  Depending how badly damaged the water table gets could impact a large area of the murray darling basin.

Why are we allowing a company and country to increase the over supply of one of the main income commodities we export?  Why take on the risk of building a coal mine when you can buy exisiting mines on the cheap since they're not making money.

Whether India can achieve their stated goal, but they plan to start reducing their coal imports.  China already has.  Where's the extra production going to go in a market that's already well oversupplied?  It just doesn't make economic sense for us to willingly allow more supply onto a market that will just see profits decimated.

Can you imagine the claims of bias if the ABC had landline do a report on the issue???


----------



## awg (9 July 2015)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> R
> I no longer watch Qanda as it gives me a headache, and I find scrolling through ASF much better therapy than Qanda of a Monday night.gg




funny, I couldnt bear it as everyone just pushing their own barrow, made me want to throw up with all that predictable, posturing BS...I suspect they tried to "jazz it up" recently...wonder if the ratings have gone up?


----------



## noco (9 July 2015)

chiff said:


> Noco ...I see you have listed what someone else sees as a socialist agenda.
> I think that we should get your thoughts on all of these points-not just slogans.
> I would like to know your views on the compatibility of the two ideas -political correctness and respectful behaviour?
> I am sure that you have thought about these things,and I am sure that you would like to lift the standard of debate.
> After that we will go onto the next point on the list.




Firstly I have noted from my own observations what the socialists agenda is all about and  I have lived long enough to see what is happening and will press my point without what you call slogans....Some people will agree with me and some won't.

It is very obvious from your comments that you do not like my opinion or my political beliefs which is well known to the lefties on this forum and that is stiff bickkies.....

Political correctness ????????????? Does this really exist?...I doubt it.

Respectful behavior??????Is it your opinion that I don't and can you give me some examples?...I have been shown a lot of disrespect from certain people on this forum but I guess that is OK in your opinion.

So what standard of level of debate do you desire?...A one sided debate where everyone agrees with you?...Now that is what I call socialism which is one step behind communism. 

And what is your next point on the list?

I am sure you have some thinking to do in what you believe in or what you  have been brainwashed at school.


----------



## chiff (9 July 2015)

Believe it or not Noco that was not personally directed at you-but you seem sensitive on the issue.
I think there is always a conflict and a balance between the two issues.Governments departments have policies regarding respectful behaviour,or else if we were had open slather with politically incorrect behaviour.We may well have fist fights in the corridors.This goes to gender race sexuality etc.
When your anti-socialist post makes comments about politically correct behaviour-what do you mean?I asked you about the balance between respectful  behaviour and politically correct (or incorrect) behaviour.
For reasons of harmony Asian countries are very strong on respectful behaviour.
What are your views on this?


----------



## noco (9 July 2015)

chiff said:


> Believe it or not Noco that was not personally directed at you-but you seem sensitive on the issue.
> I think there is always a conflict and a balance between the two issues.Governments departments have policies regarding respectful behaviour,or else if we were had open slather with politically incorrect behaviour.We may well have fist fights in the corridors.This goes to gender race sexuality etc.
> When your anti-socialist post makes comments about politically correct behaviour-what do you mean?I asked you about the balance between respectful  behaviour and politically correct (or incorrect) behaviour.
> For reasons of harmony Asian countries are very strong on respectful behaviour.
> What are your views on this?




Believe it or not whether it was personally directed at me........If it was not personally directed at me, why did you mention my screen name.....You seem to be in conflict with yourself.


----------



## Tisme (9 July 2015)

So Packer's boy, Ray isn't good enough to judge Caesar. Maybe if Andrew Bolt got the job it would be a fairer?


----------



## IFocus (10 July 2015)

So we have a bunch of losers (Abbott Government) telling all and sundry that the ABC is rotten and bad.....heads should roll and those here on board with the propaganda, liar, right wing cheer squad all nodding their heads solemnly.

Reality check FFS. (I know the true blue RW think every thing ABC bad regardless its in the genes)

One of the most trusted organizations (ABC) is being investigated by one of the most distrusted organizations (Abbott government leader totally discredited) cheered on by those media organizations that also rank at the bottom of any trust rating how is this so?

There is no one in the current political land scape that doesn't see the current actions form Abbott as bulling and intimidation to the ABC to become the government propaganda arm of the government.

On top of that the disputed programs are less than 2% to 4% of ABC programing 

That of course is not including programs like the killing season etc again FFS get a grip its an extraordinary situation you couldn't make up seriously.


----------



## MrBurns (10 July 2015)

Funny how the ABC web site has nothing about Shorten open for comment.......yes funny about that


----------



## sydboy007 (10 July 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Funny how the ABC web site has nothing about Shorten open for comment.......yes funny about that




Do they have anything open for comment about Abbott?


----------



## MrBurns (10 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Do they have anything open for comment about Abbott?




Only when there's something their demented left wing followers can gripe about.


----------



## sydboy007 (10 July 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Only when there's something their demented left wing followers can gripe about.




Could you post a link to back up your claim?


----------



## MrBurns (10 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Could you post a link to back up your claim?





If you post or follow their site you'd understand.


----------



## noco (10 July 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull has pulled out of QandA....Good to note Tony Abbott has the backing of his ministers in boycotting  QandA until such times as they change their tune.....Tony Jones, along with Mark Scott might now come to their senses.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...g-on-abc-show-qa/story-fnihmoiz-1227437107314


----------



## wayneL (10 July 2015)

News Radio seemed to trust implicitly in Short'uns integrity today.

It reminds of the curious incident of the dog in the night-time


----------



## SirRumpole (10 July 2015)

noco said:


> Malcolm Turnbull has pulled out of QandA....Good to note Tony Abbott has the backing of his ministers in boycotting  QandA until such times as they change their tune.....Tony Jones, along with Mark Scott might now come to their senses.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...g-on-abc-show-qa/story-fnihmoiz-1227437107314




Absence of LNP Ministers is just giving oxygen to the Opposition, but if the government is too stupid to realise that, that is their problem.


----------



## IFocus (10 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Absence of LNP Ministers is just giving oxygen to the Opposition, but if the government is too stupid to realise that, that is their problem.




The story is now about Abbott and his intimidation and attacks of the ABC, swinging voters will just love that looking forward to the next poll numbers.


----------



## noco (10 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Absence of LNP Ministers is just giving oxygen to the Opposition, but if the government is too stupid to realise that, that is their problem.




The LNP Ministers don't need to give the Green/Labor socialists any oxygen.......They a full of hot air already.

Anyway, lets wait and see if the ABC put on a true impartial face.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 July 2015)

IFocus said:


> The story is now about Abbott and his intimidation and attacks of the ABC, swinging voters will just love that looking forward to the next poll numbers.




Yes, I think you have that correct. Abbott may appeal to the hard Right, but most voters are centre or slightly Left and so Abbott's Party room appeal will most likely not translate to electoral support.


----------



## Macquack (10 July 2015)

noco said:


> Malcolm Turnbull has pulled out of QandA....Good to note Tony Abbott has the *backing of his ministers in boycotting  QandA until such times*...




I can just see Malcolm mounting a challenge to the leadership of the government based on the principle that Tony Abbott won't let him play with the ABC.


----------



## explod (10 July 2015)

noco said:


> ... a true impartial face.




Oh,  and you would know about that ole pal.


----------



## noco (10 July 2015)

explod said:


> Oh,  and you would know about that ole pal.




Sure do...I learned it all from you.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2015)

noco said:


> Malcolm Turnbull has pulled out of QandA....Good to note Tony Abbott has the backing of his ministers in boycotting  QandA until such times as they change their tune.....Tony Jones, along with Mark Scott might now come to their senses.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/enter...g-on-abc-show-qa/story-fnihmoiz-1227437107314




I made up my mind a few years back that Malcolm was a neuter Tom. He just allowed Tony to take what residue of self esteem he had.

Of course he invented the internet didn't he, by owning shares in a ISP dotcom company that somebody else developed.

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/clarke-and-dawe/NC1559V024S00#playing


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2015)

The irony of it all 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-14/abbott-backs-free-speech-paris-attacks-andrew-bolt-18c/6016968


----------



## sydboy007 (11 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> I made up my mind a few years back that Malcolm was a neuter Tom. He just allowed Tony to take what residue of self esteem he had.
> 
> Of course he invented the internet didn't he, by owning shares in a ISP dotcom company that somebody else developed.
> 
> http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/clarke-and-dawe/NC1559V024S00#playing




hang on a sec.  Wasn't Turnbull creating the internet in Australia the main reason he was made comms minister and Abbott trumpeted it as meaning he was eminently qualified to rollout out their full costed ready to go end of 2016 everyone would be getting a minimum 25Mbs internet access?

Oh wait, I see you point now with his lack of actual telecoms industry experience.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> hang on a sec.  Wasn't Turnbull creating the internet in Australia the main reason he was made comms minister and Abbott trumpeted it as meaning he was eminently qualified to rollout out their full costed ready to go end of 2016 everyone would be getting a minimum 25Mbs internet access?
> 
> Oh wait, I see you point now with his lack of actual telecoms industry experience.




Yes, trouble is what experience have all the other Ministers had in their portfolios ? I suppose at least Turnbull's analytical lawyers brain might help him discern fact from fiction. I have less confidence in most of the other Ministers.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> hang on a sec.  Wasn't Turnbull creating the internet in Australia the main reason he was made comms minister and Abbott trumpeted it as meaning he was eminently qualified to rollout out their full costed ready to go end of 2016 everyone would be getting a minimum 25Mbs internet access?
> 
> Oh wait, I see you point now with his lack of actual telecoms industry experience.




As I recall Paul Keating had a toe in the phone over internet concept. So I'm guessing he should be forever known as the father of phone and voip systems.

Yes for knobs like me that were designing and overseeing the install of network fibre pipes back in the mid eighties, it's a bit aggravating to see how little we have progressed in 30 years. There were so many armchair experts back then who read it in some acronym filled PC magazine, and Malcolm was probably one of them.


----------



## Tisme (13 July 2015)

Rather worrying EPG for ABC2 ... well worrying for prudes like me, but obviously not for one or two here who think children should be exposed to many kinds of adult behaviours


----------



## SirRumpole (13 July 2015)

Tisme said:


> Rather worrying EPG for ABC2 ... well worrying for prudes like me, but obviously not for one or two here who think children should be exposed to many kinds of adult behaviours
> 
> 
> View attachment 63383




One can only hope that by 9:30 they are all in bed


----------



## Tisme (13 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> One can only hope that by 9:30 they are all in bed





Not these days and the parental lock probably stays open on that station


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

This Tony Jones and the ABC are lower than a rattle snakes belly.

To bring a brain washed and well rehearsed 10 year old child on QandA to criticize the Prime Minister of this country is as low as they can get.

What will he have on next week? An orangutan monkey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Jones has enough monkeys in the audience already ...What a d^ck head.

I did not watch it....

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...440681735?sv=f01bd9a2486e21eecf73da8074aaf162

A* public backhand was served to the Prime Minister on Q&A when panellists were asked by a 10-year-old boy about Tony Abbott’s recent “attacks” and attempts to “control” the ABC and Q&A.

“I know I’m only 10, but Tony Abbott scares me when he attacks the ABC and tries to control what we see on it. Should we all be afraid of his attacks on Q&A and ABC, both things I love?” 10-year-old Ashton Platt, from Highbury in South Australia, asked the panel through a prerecorded video.*


----------



## overhang (14 July 2015)

noco said:


> This Tony Jones and the ABC are lower than a rattle snakes belly.
> 
> To bring a brain washed and well rehearsed 10 year old child on QandA to criticize the Prime Minister of this country is as low as they can get.
> 
> ...




Did not watch it either but that's below the belt if the ABC used a 10 year old for political gain.  I highly doubt a 10 year old would actually care at all about Q&A, if so then I fear for this child's ability to individually think for himself as clearly his parents are pulling the strings.


----------



## dutchie (14 July 2015)

noco said:


> This Tony Jones and the ABC are lower than a rattle snakes belly.
> 
> To bring a brain washed and well rehearsed 10 year old child on QandA to criticize the Prime Minister of this country is as low as they can get.





Shame the ABC


----------



## dutchie (14 July 2015)

Letting a child of ten watch Q and A. 

I'm calling that child abuse.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2015)

I don't generally agree with children being used in this way, but he did ask a question which needed to be answered.


----------



## pixel (14 July 2015)

dutchie said:


> Shame the ABC




Why not "Shame Abbott & Co"? for turning oppressive that even a smart ten-year old recognises a witch hunt when he sees one. Some kids do take an interest in their future, well before they're allowed to vote.
As to time of day/night: Hasn't anybody stayed up a little later during school holidays? 

I reckon this kid is to be commended for taking an interest; he could've wasted his time "hanging out" with mates or playing computer games.


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2015)

Pixel I reckon you've been had


----------



## pixel (14 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Pixel I reckon you've been had




No, Wayne;
merely trying to keep this debate TWO-sided. 
The alternative would be to stay quiet and ignore all topics with one-sided contentious views. Which wouldn't leave much reason for me to visit ASF...


----------



## dutchie (14 July 2015)

pixel said:


> Why not "Shame Abbott & Co"? for turning oppressive that even a smart ten-year old recognises a witch hunt when he sees one. Some kids do take an interest in their future, well before they're allowed to vote.
> As to time of day/night: Hasn't anybody stayed up a little later during school holidays?
> 
> I reckon this kid is to be commended for taking an interest; he could've wasted his time "hanging out" with mates or playing computer games.




You are _kidding_ , aren't you, Pixel?


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2015)

Dude, there isn't any onesideness on ASF as far as I can see.

Notwithstanding the point made, apart from being able to hack into the CIA et al, ten year olds offer no special insight into matters political and is likely regurgitating yhe opinions of his parents. 

It does introduce psycholigical artifact however. Nobody wants to verbally punch the crap out of a ten year old, even if deserved. And if the kid is taken to task, his adversary is likely to be negatively judged on the basis of said artifact rather than on the merit of points made.

The ABC had cleverly created an unlevel playing field and they know it. 

.....and playing to that is not wise.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 July 2015)

dutchie said:


> You are _kidding_ , aren't you, Pixel?




Let's all talk about a minor distraction and ignore the big issues. Looks like the populace is being played to me.


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> Let's all talk about a minor distraction and ignore the big issues. Looks like the populace is being played to me.




My point exactly.


----------



## Ijustnewit (14 July 2015)

The problem is the ABC won't let this sore heal , they keep picking away at it and now are using children as a mouthpiece in an effort to avoid any backlash. 
Meanwhile the Breakfast teams Virginia Trioli continues to dig at the Abbott Government every chance she gets . Trioli continues to find and air comments that are anti Abbott from any twitter or email hate fest she can lay her hands on. Now Trioli is entitled to her views or political preferences , however she employed by tax payer monies to be fair and give a balanced view that the taxpayer deserves. In balanced I mean a comment from social media other than the hate mail she digs up to air , why doesn't she air a positive comment made by a person on twitter or email to be fair ? 
It was also interesting that when Cassidy made his usual Friday appearance on ABC News Breakfast he leapt to Shortens defence from the weeks union enquiry . He glossed over the main detail and basically said Shorten was treated like some sort of criminal . Cassidy spent as little time as he could on the pending subject before again  turning to some minimal hearsay between Abbott and Turnbull and attacking them as best as he could to fill in the rest of the segment. In others words again not so balanced reporting from your ABC.


----------



## explod (14 July 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> The problem is the ABC won't let this sore heal , they keep picking away at it and now are using children as a mouthpiece in an effort to avoid any backlash.
> Meanwhile the Breakfast teams Virginia Trioli continues to dig at the Abbott Government every chance she gets . Trioli continues to find and air comments that are anti Abbott from any twitter or email hate fest she can lay her hands on. Now Trioli is entitled to her views or political preferences , however she employed by tax payer monies to be fair and give a balanced view that the taxpayer deserves. In balanced I mean a comment from social media other than the hate mail she digs up to air , why doesn't she air a positive comment made by a person on twitter or email to be fair ?
> It was also interesting that when Cassidy made his usual Friday appearance on ABC News Breakfast he leapt to Shortens defence from the weeks union enquiry . He glossed over the main detail and basically said Shorten was treated like some sort of criminal . Cassidy spent as little time as he could on the pending subject before again  turning to some minimal hearsay between Abbott and Turnbull and attacking them as best as he could to fill in the rest of the segment. In others words again not so balanced reporting from your ABC.




Excuse me,  comentators are entitled to reflect the other side of the coin.  Lets face it free media is democracy. 

And although my children loved Peter Rabbit,  Mr Abbott's thoughtless rants are giving him a bad name. 

Now what's you view noco ole PAL.


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2015)

explod said:


> Excuse me,  comentators are entitled to reflect the other side of the coin.  Lets face it free media is democracy.
> 
> And although my children loved Peter Rabbit,  Mr Abbott's thoughtless rants are giving him a bad name.
> 
> Now what's you view noco ole PAL.




Dear God mr plod! Please go and acquaint yourself with the abc charter ffs.


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

explod said:


> Excuse me,  comentators are entitled to reflect the other side of the coin.  Lets face it free media is democracy.
> 
> And although my children loved Peter Rabbit,  Mr Abbott's thoughtless rants are giving him a bad name.
> 
> Now what's you view noco ole PAL.




Shorten has slumped in the polls while Abbott continues to be the preferred Prime Minister...Shorten is the one with the bad name...What is your view my son?


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2015)

Tony Jones again gave a Labor politician a hard time over Bill Shorten at the RC, but that seems to have gone unnoticed by the Righties here. John Hewson had a dream run, although as he is retired I suppose that doesn't count.


----------



## explod (14 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Dear God mr plod! Please go and acquaint yourself with the abc charter ffs.




Forget the charter BOSSY BOOTS,  all feelings and sides should have a voice and be vented. 

Even Jihad on Q and A is healthy so that the community can freely discuss and make up thier own minds.  And perhaps being able to vent would circumvent more violent actions. 

Remember when researching graffitee artists,  they were just seeking an ear which was not at home.


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Dear God mr plod! Please go and acquaint yourself with the abc charter ffs.




wayne, it is all a part of the Fabian tactic who dictates the terms to the left wing of politics....Get control of the media, promote the Green/Labor socialist propaganda, brain wash the kids and the naive and always criticize and discredit  a Conservative government and its leaders when the opportunity arises.....Pick up on any slip of the tongue by Abbott or his Ministers and expand and exaggerate the matter to make it look better for the Labor Party.

Virginia Tripoli sticks out like the old proverbial thunder box we used to have in our back yards.l


----------



## pixel (14 July 2015)

wayneL said:


> Dear God mr plod! Please go and acquaint yourself with the abc charter ffs.




Can you be a bit more specific?
What part of the charter to you think applies?
And in what way do you allege it is violated by allowing people to voice their concern?

Just as an aside, Paul Murray, who is usually a staunch supporter of Liberal policies, was scathing in his assessment of the Zac Mallah affair. Censorship has no place in a democratic society, and lambasting QandA for allowing an inconvenient question, demanding heads to roll, and threatening funding cuts fits precisely the definition of censorship.


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

pixel said:


> Can you be a bit more specific?
> What part of the charter to you think applies?
> And in what way do you allege it is violated by allowing people to voice their concern?
> 
> Just as an aside, Paul Murray, who is usually a staunch supporter of Liberal policies, was scathing in his assessment of the Zac Mallah affair. Censorship has no place in a democratic society, and lambasting QandA for allowing an inconvenient question, demanding heads to roll, and threatening funding cuts fits precisely the definition of censorship.




I have just explained the ABC tactics in my previous post #2158...If you don't believe me do some research on the Fabian Society...If you can't find anything on the Fabians, I could supply you with plenty of links.


----------



## sptrawler (14 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Tony Jones again gave a Labor politician a hard time over Bill Shorten at the RC, but that seems to have gone unnoticed by the Righties here. John Hewson had a dream run, although as he is retired I suppose that doesn't count.




I don't watch it, so can't comment, chook food, like the Bolt report. 

Made for chook's, by shock jock's who have a photogenic face, otherwise they would be on the radio.IMO

I guess the media has statistical evidence, to support it's focus on an audience, with grade 4 reading level.

How anyone can take them seriously, is beyond me.


----------



## pixel (14 July 2015)

noco said:


> wayne, it is all a part of the Fabian tactic who dictates the terms to the left wing of politics....Get control of the media, promote the Green/Labor socialist propaganda, brain wash the kids and the naive and always criticize and discredit  a Conservative government and its leaders when the opportunity arises.....Pick up on any slip of the tongue by Abbott or his Ministers and expand and exaggerate the matter to make it look better for the Labor Party.




noco, it is all a part of the Jesuit/ Nationalist tactic who dictates the terms to the right wing of politics....Get control of the media, promote the right-wing supremacy propaganda, brain wash the kids and the naive and always criticize and discredit  a social-minded government and its leaders when the opportunity arises.....Pick up on any slip of the tongue by a Laborite and expand and exaggerate the matter to make it look better for the Reactionaries.

Rinse and repeat ad nauseam.


----------



## IFocus (14 July 2015)

Reminder, the most trusted being accused by the most untrusted..............


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

pixel said:


> noco, it is all a part of the Jesuit/ Nationalist tactic who dictates the terms to the right wing of politics....Get control of the media, promote the right-wing supremacy propaganda, brain wash the kids and the naive and always criticize and discredit  a social-minded government and its leaders when the opportunity arises.....Pick up on any slip of the tongue by a Laborite and expand and exaggerate the matter to make it look better for the Reactionaries.
> 
> Rinse and repeat ad nauseam.




I would be interested in any link you would to provide to understand your argument regarding Jesuit/Nationals

Correct me if I am wrong but are you suggesting an association with Naziism?


----------



## noco (14 July 2015)

The script that the 10 year old boy read out on QandA was written with help Mum and Dad who say they have "NO AFFILIATION WITH ANY POLITICAL PARTY"???????????????

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...440681735?sv=f01bd9a2486e21eecf73da8074aaf162

*The father of the 10-year-old boy who appeared on ABC’s Q&A program last night has admitted that he and his wife helped to write their son’s question taking Tony Abbott to task over his “attacks” and attempts to “control” the ABC. *

The say helped...would be interesting to learn the full facts behind their motives.

But it was very clever of Jones to grasp it with both hands...I wonder how may other on line question he threw in the waste paper basket.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I don't watch it, so can't comment, chook food, like the Bolt report.
> 
> Made for chook's, by shock jock's who have a photogenic face, otherwise they would be on the radio.IMO
> 
> ...




I think you are being a bit unkind. As well as the pollies (who usually are a waste of time), there is usually a sprinkling of academics and experts in various fields to cut up the political bulldust.

I'm very glad to see that they seem to have dispensed with the professional comedians, singer songwriters and opinionated bloggers, although next week Alan Jones is on. I thought he was quite reasonable last time and I hope someone asks him about CSG as that would be good entertainment.


----------



## sptrawler (14 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I think you are being a bit unkind. As well as the pollies (who usually are a waste of time), there is usually a sprinkling of academics and experts in various fields to cut up the political bulldust.
> 
> I'm very glad to see that they seem to have dispensed with the professional comedians, singer songwriters and opinionated bloggers, although next week Alan Jones is on. I thought he was quite reasonable last time and I hope someone asks him about CSG as that would be good entertainment.




Well my track record will be unbroken, although I have heard of Alan Jones through snippets on the news, I've never heard him speak.

One of the pluses, of living in W.A.


----------



## nioka (14 July 2015)

Tony Abbott has once again put his foot in his mouth by his attack on the ABC. He has taken away, for the moment. the chance for HIS side of the debate to have their say. I'm sure he has lost some more voting support for his actions from a lot of older conservative voters who generally watch the ABC as their first choice for viewing television. Personally I watch the ABC as I find the commercials on the commercial channels annoying. My usual only exception is the cricket and rugby league and I wish the government would fund the ABC to show them as was a case in the past. Abbott has made the ABC more political because of his actions.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 July 2015)

sptrawler said:


> One of the pluses, of living in W.A.




Oh sorry, I didn't realise you were THAT far Left


----------



## drsmith (16 July 2015)

Has SBS topped the ABC's Q&A ?

http://www.msn.com/en-au/entertainm...shot-at-by-islamic-state/ar-AAd29q1?ocid=iehp


----------



## sptrawler (16 July 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Oh sorry, I didn't realise you were THAT far Left




When I was young and full of idealism, I used to hand out how to vote cards, for Tom Jones MLA. They don't make them like him anymore. 

As you get older you begin to realise, there are very few, who put others in front of themselves. 

There are many who purport to do so, but eventually, an ulterior motive comes through.


----------



## noco (17 July 2015)

The neo Marxist trait never ceases in the ABC to discredit a conservative government, their leader and his Ministers....To use a child for their mission is to attack Tony Abbott is as low as they can get.

That 10 year old child could not possibly have understood what was about to happen without a certain amount of brainwashing....Even the script he read out they say was written by his parents and possibly with some help and suggestion from Tony Jones himself......The Fabians will stop at nothing to promote their propaganda.   

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...olitical-weapons/story-e6frg6zo-1227444776440

*The culture of the contemporary Left is so riven with political avarice and ideological ambition that even the use of children as political shields does not register a tremor on its rank moral barometer. Yet despite the 50-year neo-Marxist assault on the fabric of civil society, we still regard childhood as a sacred part of life whose innocence must be guarded if the human imagination and capacity for wonder is to flourish anew in each generation.

Politics played artfully is a decidedly adult affair. Let the children be children.*

Communism is not dead and buried.....It is still very much alive in Australia.


----------



## wayneL (17 July 2015)

True dat... about the left. Unable to recognise their own moral hazard, or their megalithic hypocrisy.


----------



## Macquack (17 July 2015)

noco said:


> The neo Marxist trait never ceases in the ABC to discredit a conservative government, their leader and his Ministers....To use a child for their mission is to attack Tony Abbott is as low as they can get.
> 
> That 10 year old child could not possibly have understood what was about to happen without a certain amount of brainwashing....Even the script he read out they say was written by his parents and possibly with some help and suggestion from Tony Jones himself......The Fabians will stop at nothing to promote their propaganda.
> 
> ...




Oh won't somebody PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN.


----------



## noco (20 July 2015)

Tony Jones Q&A....the great pretender...the great manipulator......

The link below shows how he manipulates Q&A.....I am going to interrupt you here says Jones when he believes the answer is adverse to his show.

Plus ....read the many adverse comments on Jones.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...448173065?sv=3cca041409bd8b00dab23b14e9af3f2a

*Speaking of that interminable Q&A controversy, there is another reason that infamous Mallah episode was memorable and MediaWatch Watch has been meaning to get back to it ever since. It relates to that regular frustration for regular viewers that we might refer to as Q&A interruptus. Not only do right-of-centre panellists tend to be outnumbered two to one but they often seem to have some difficulty getting any flow into their answers. A random sample might turn up Sophie Mirabella in July 2013. “Tony, the polls have changed,” Mirabella said, “but a third of the frontbench, very experienced ministers, refuse to serve with Kevin Rudd and, you know ...” But the host chips in. “OK,” says Tony Jones, “I am going to interrupt you there …” Later in the same episode Mirabella went on. “Over the last 12 months, Tony Abbott has done twice as many interviews as Julia Gillard has done and he is out there every day. He’s out ...” Again, Jones jumps in. “Can you explain why we don’t see him doing long format interviews? Why he won’t do this program or Lateline or Insiders?” Good question, perhaps we could take it as a comment from the Prime Minister. Back in 2010 (believe it or not) Abbott was on the program and spoke about Labor’s leadership coup. “Now, that would never happen in our party,” said the Liberal leader. “Because you openly stab people in the back, OK,” Jones snapped back. “We don’t have,” Abbott began before the host jumped in again. “All right, sorry, no, I’m just going to interrupt.”

In November last year Attorney-General George Brandis was a solo panellist. “But this is a particular threat to your community because you’re the victim of these predators,” he said. “Well, George, I’m going to interrupt you there,” said Jones. The Education Minister joined the panel in March. “Christopher, I’m not meaning to interrupt here but I’m actually,” said the host. Christopher Pyne protested. “I was asked a question,” he complained, “so I was just answering it.”

You get the picture. It’s all part of the cut and thrust and all the more reason, in my view, for Coalition MPs to get back on the program and robustly argue their case. Politicians boycotting television are like fishermen refusing to go to sea.*


----------



## Logique (22 July 2015)

Leigh Sales gave no soft interview to Bill Shorten on the 7:30 Report tonight, he could hardly got a word in edgewise.


----------



## nioka (22 July 2015)

Logique said:


> Leigh Sales gave no soft interview to Bill Shorten on the 7:30 Report tonight, he could hardly got a word in edgewise.




Strange. I thought that Leigh was the one that hardly got a word in edgewise. Funny how people see what they want to see


----------



## noco (22 July 2015)

Logique said:


> Leigh Sales gave no soft interview to Bill Shorten on the 7:30 Report tonight, he could hardly got a word in edgewise.





As per usual with Shorten, he rambles on about Abbott instead of answering the questions about him and his comrades in the Green/Labor socialist coalition.

Sales tried to bring back to the question but his usual rhetoric, he always says, "I will come to that in a minute  but first I want to talk about Abbott".

Shorten is now becoming so predictable.


----------



## Ijustnewit (31 July 2015)

There is no surprise the ABC News page has opened up yet another Bronwyn Bishop hate fest comments page .
However when the Socialist Uni hire a mob smash public property and create a public nuisance during Pyne's book launch the silence from the ABC is deafening .


----------



## Macquack (31 July 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> There is no surprise the ABC News page has opened up yet another Bronwyn Bishop hate fest comments page .
> However when the Socialist Uni hire a mob smash public property and create a public nuisance during Pyne's book launch the silence from the ABC is deafening .




The "C-Bomb" Pyne launches a private book. He is obviously not busy enough in parliament.


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2015)

Macquack said:


> The "C-Bomb" Pyne launches a private book. He is obviously not busy enough in parliament.




Is this the book about his love for public service? Whatever happen to actions being louder than words? Especially words no one but his parents and the poor kids are forced to read?


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2015)

Macquack said:


> The "C-Bomb" Pyne launches a private book. He is obviously not busy enough in parliament.




So mean spirited. All sorts of busy high profile people write books; politicians of every colour, CEOs, sportsmen and women, housewives even. Dammit he has a right to some spare time and he has a right to write a book in it ffs!


----------



## Macquack (1 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> So mean spirited. All sorts of busy high profile people write books; politicians of every colour, CEOs, sportsmen and women, housewives even. Dammit he has a right to some spare time and he has a right to write a book in it ffs!




Pyne should save writing any books to when he is retired from parliament, still on the taxpayers purse, but being then paid to do absolutely nothing.


----------



## explod (1 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> So mean spirited. All sorts of busy high profile people write books; politicians of every colour, CEOs, sportsmen and women, housewives even. Dammit he has a right to some spare time and he has a right to write a book in it ffs!




Yep,  seen it through a number of colleges,  helps to get it off thier chest,  but just rubbish at the opp shops in 12 months,  better to lean against wisdom such as yours


----------



## DB008 (1 August 2015)

Ijustnewit said:


> There is no surprise the ABC News page has opened up yet another Bronwyn Bishop hate fest comments page .
> However when the Socialist Uni hire a mob smash public property and create a public nuisance during Pyne's book launch the silence from the ABC is deafening .




For s##t's and giggles, l had a look.

You weren't wrong mate.


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2015)

explod said:


> Yep,  seen it through a number of colleges,  helps to get it off thier chest,  but just rubbish at the opp shops in 12 months,  better to lean against wisdom such as yours




The fact that Pyne's tome is unlikely to generate any lasting interest is irrelevant ( I won't be buying it, even at op shop prices).

The greater point is that in our liberal (in the true politico - ideological sense not in the Liberal political party sense)  society, Pyne has a right to write a book, present the same for publication and for the publisher to exercise their mercantile judgement to publish it.

That supposedly liberal (in the true politico - ideological sense not in the Liberal political party sense) ideologues here would seek to construe that he has no right to do so as a/a sitting parliamentarian and b/as someone who disagrees with their personal ideology , exposes their totalitarian motive.

Plod, Quacker,  it is against the likes of you I would readily take up arms....

a/ to preserve my right to an opinion, and 
b/ ironically to preserve your right to an opinion.

I am truly astonished and appalled at the repugnancy of your views.


----------



## explod (1 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> The fact that Pyne's tome is unlikely to generate any lasting interest is irrelevant ( I won't be buying it, even at op shop prices).
> 
> The greater point is that in our liberal (in the true politico - ideological sense not in the Liberal political party sense)  society, Pyne has a right to write a book, present the same for publication and for the publisher to exercise their mercantile judgement to publish it.
> 
> ...




Do not deny his rights at all. 

Just thinking of the hot air content. 

Do you really believe the current pollies (all sides) are trying to keep us tracking.  No ideas for productivity.


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2015)

explod said:


> Do not deny his rights at all.
> 
> Just thinking of the hot air content.
> 
> Do you really believe the current pollies (all sides) are trying to keep us tracking.  No ideas for productivity.




No

But that wasn't the point.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 August 2015)

Would be interesting to see how many people actually buy political biographies. All they are is a whitewash of the egregiousness of the authors and a desire to paint themselves in the best possible light.

Pure propaganda, whatever side they are on.


----------



## Macquack (2 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> Plod, Quacker,  *it is against the likes of you I would readily take up arms*....
> 
> a/ to preserve my right to an opinion, and
> b/ ironically to preserve your right to an opinion.
> ...




You are in the wrong country Wayne (we are not the USA), taking up arms to protect yourself from people with different views.

All I said was Pyne should write his book in his own time not at the taxpayer's expense.

Lighten up a bit.


----------



## Tisme (3 August 2015)

Macquack said:


> You are in the wrong country Wayne (we are not the USA), taking up arms to protect yourself from people with different views.
> 
> All I said was Pyne should write his book in his own time not at the taxpayer's expense.
> 
> Lighten up a bit.




I'd suggest his tome would be about as factual and inspiring as the second edition and third reprint of the "Giant Book of Aboriginal Prime Ministers".


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2015)

Macquack said:


> You are in the wrong country Wayne (we are not the USA), taking up arms to protect yourself from people with different views.
> 
> All I said was Pyne should write his book in his own time not at the taxpayer's expense.
> 
> Lighten up a bit.




You think the taxpayer owns 100% of his time.  We don't. 

And while the left (or the right) proposes drastic curtails on reasonable liberties, I will never "lighten up"


----------



## Macquack (3 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> You think the taxpayer owns 100% of his time.  We don't.
> 
> And while the left (or the right) proposes drastic curtails on reasonable liberties, *I will never "lighten up*"




You need to get fired up about something with a bit more substance than protecting that weasel Pyne and his god given right to write a book on taxpayer time.


----------



## trainspotter (3 August 2015)

Macquack said:


> You need to get fired up about something with a bit more substance than protecting that weasel Pyne and his god given right to write a book on taxpayer time.




You mean the one that Gillard wrote or the one that Swan wrote?



> "Consistent with the past, Mr Rudd has no substantive comment to make on Ms Gillard's latest contribution to Australian fiction," Mr Rudd said through a spokesman.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tification-20140924-10ljcf.html#ixzz3hkEq76Z9



> It was Mr Swan, for example, who triggered a carpet bombing of Mr Rudd's reputation by senior ministers before the 2012 leadership challenge to Julia Gillard when he said the then-foreign minister ''does not hold any Labor values''.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-kevin-rudd-20140815-3ds93.html#ixzz3hkF9n9hf 

Ahhhh Mustelids ... Mustelids everywhere !


----------



## SirRumpole (3 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> You think the taxpayer owns 100% of his time.  We don't.




They seem to want to charge us for as much time as they can get away with.


----------



## Tisme (4 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> You think the taxpayer owns 100% of his time.  We don't.
> 
> And while the left (or the right) proposes drastic curtails on reasonable liberties, I will never "lighten up"




We are told and witness very long sessions of parliament and extensive travel costs in between to attend call of duty meetings. Add in the spin doctoring +  family time.... Chris Pyne would hardly have the"me time" to write a book.

Chris supported Workchoices so he could hardly excuse himself not working 24/7 for the man.


----------



## wayneL (4 August 2015)

Good Lord! The leftists, those champions of the 35 hour week, suffer a monumental double standard.

Can't say I'm surprised.


----------



## trainspotter (4 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> We are told and witness very long sessions of parliament and extensive travel costs in between to attend call of duty meetings. Add in the spin doctoring +  family time.... Chris Pyne would hardly have the"me time" to write a book.
> 
> Chris supported Workchoices so he could hardly excuse himself not working 24/7 for the man.




Maybe you have heard of a ghost writer? Anyways ... as you stated they spend horrendous amounts of time travelling in First Class .... maybe they jot their memoirs on the back of the serviette and it develops into a missive which in turn becomes a book 

Pyne's latest hard back coming to a book store near you ...


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2015)

Interesting outcome to the audit of the ABC, by the ABC.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-higher-education-debate-20150810-givw4v.html

Very telling comments from the review:

**   hosts allowing their apparent personal views to shine through in their journalism
 *   an over-emphasis on the politics of the issue rather than its policy implications
 *   exaggerated language, including of a government "crisis"
 *   a lack of scrutiny of Labor and the Greens' policy alternatives
*

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ion-debate-20150810-givw4v.html#ixzz3iP0HcWVa 
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook


----------



## SirRumpole (10 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting outcome to the audit of the ABC, by the ABC.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-higher-education-debate-20150810-givw4v.html
> 
> ...




I would agree that all the above points are valid criticisms of the ABC however I think they equally applied when Labor was in office. 

The ABC did very little analysis of Coalition policies when they were in Opposition, and the used the word "crisis" extensively to describe the Rudd/Gillard governments. And yes, all media outlets emphasize politics rather than policy.

Whether the audit reveals bias or slack journalism is a matter of opinion, but I go for the latter.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting outcome to the audit of the ABC, by the ABC.



At a local (WA) level, the comments about ABC radio 720 mornings host Geoff Hutchinson are unsurprising to me.

I think I heard him say on his show today that someone else will be hosting that program from Thursday.


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I would agree that all the above points are valid criticisms of the ABC however I think they equally applied when Labor was in office.
> 
> The ABC did very little analysis of Coalition policies when they were in Opposition, and the used the word "crisis" extensively to describe the Rudd/Gillard governments. And yes, all media outlets emphasize politics rather than policy.
> 
> Whether the audit reveals bias or slack journalism is a matter of opinion, but I go for the latter.




That may be all well and good, but whether Labor, Liberal or the Greens are in office, it is the responsibility of the public funded broadcaster to be unbiased.

The general public have every right to expect a media, they are paying for, is giving balanced, fair and impartial information. 

If not we may as well shut it down, it is no better than a publicly listed media.

The problem is after six years of being patted on the head, by the Government, they forgot the Government changed.


----------



## noco (10 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> That may be all well and good, but whether Labor, Liberal or the Greens are in office, it is the responsibility of the public funded broadcaster to be unbiased.
> 
> The general public have every right to expect a media, they are paying for, is giving balanced, fair and impartial information.
> 
> ...




How can it be fair and balanced when you have 41% 0f the ABC staff are Greenies, 32% Labor and 14% Liberal?

As I have said before, the ABC is the propaganda machine for the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition.......Why wouldn't they be biased towards the Labor Party and the Greens?...They are iAbbott haters.


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2015)

noco said:


> How can it be fair and balanced when you have 41% 0f the ABC staff are Greenies, 32% Labor and 14% Liberal?
> 
> As I have said before, the ABC is the propaganda machine for the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition.......Why wouldn't they be biased towards the Labor Party and the Greens?...They are iAbbott haters.




Noco go back one page, to post 2199, all will be revealed.


----------



## Tisme (11 August 2015)

trainspotter said:


> Maybe you have heard of a ghost writer? Anyways ... as you stated they spend horrendous amounts of time travelling in First Class .... maybe they jot their memoirs on the back of the serviette and it develops into a missive which in turn becomes a book
> 
> Pyne's latest hard back coming to a book store near you ...




LOL  I like that post


----------



## Tisme (11 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting outcome to the audit of the ABC, by the ABC.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-higher-education-debate-20150810-givw4v.html
> 
> ...




In the case of Virginia and Michael, they should add a fifth line : "commentators waxing lyrical about stuff that they have no idea of"  For example harping on the other week about air conditioning being set to comfort levels mandated 50 years ago, when (presumably) we just emerged from caves; for such a self confessed expert on everything and a degree snob, Virginia needs to buy a clue.

I'm soo tempted to throw some virtual spears via facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/breakfastnews

In the matter of bias, well the ABC is the mouthpiece for the public service and we all know the public service whine and b1t(h behind the facade of stoicism. Generally, they don't care who they have a go it, but will swarm to sting anyone who threatens the colony.


----------



## noco (11 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Noco go back one page, to post 2199, all will be revealed.




Yes sp, all very true and it is now confirming what I have been saying for some years on this forum.

The Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition (communism) are following the Fabian Society rules to the letter and that is to convert Australia to socialism, it is essential to control the media fitst......discredit the Liberal Party and its leaders.......exaggerate and criticize their policies and whatever a Liberal MP may or may not say and the naive swallow their propaganda hook, line and sinker.....Many voters who don't like either major party then vote for the Greens or an independent and their preference votes are then passed on to Labor. 

The Fabians are very clever by half and their under handed tactics are now being revealed.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2015)

drsmith said:


> At a local (WA) level, the comments about ABC radio 720 mornings host Geoff Hutchinson are unsurprising to me.
> 
> I think I heard him say on his show today that someone else will be hosting that program from Thursday.



Correction.

It's the breakfast show host that's changing, not the morning show.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2015)

drsmith said:


> Correction.
> 
> It's the breakfast show host that's changing, not the morning show.




Ah that would be the ex Liberal MP another left wing...........ops

He is going for surgery.


----------



## drsmith (12 August 2015)

IFocus said:


> Ah that would be the ex Liberal MP another left wing...........ops
> 
> He is going for surgery.



If you read my two short posts more carefully, you'll note I haven't commented on the politics of the host of the Breakfast Show (Eoin Cameron).


----------



## IFocus (12 August 2015)

drsmith said:


> If you read my two short posts more carefully, you'll note I haven't commented on the politics of the host of the Breakfast Show (Eoin Cameron).




That was for Noco's benefit


----------



## sptrawler (12 August 2015)

IFocus said:


> Ah that would be the ex Liberal MP another left wing...........ops
> 
> He is going for surgery.




What's the surgery for, hope it isn't anything serious, he's fun to listen to 'Dusty Springfield and all'.


----------



## noco (16 August 2015)

Be aware, the Fabian culture is at work in the ABC...At least one staffer has had the guts to speak out.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-needs-to-change/story-e6frg99o-1227457874426

I was saddened by the ABC’s response to my story in Crikey! not because of the criticism itself but because it was clear the ABC had missed the point. To quote statistics and say that over half your staff are women does not mean that they all are actively engaged and feel empowered by their work and the environment in which they work. The notion that they are changing the male power structures at the organisation is a fantasy.

The points I raised in response to Erin O’Dwyer’s story in Sunday Life for Fairfax (who, by the way, praised my story on Twitter) was to point out that the ABC is not a utopia for working parents as it had been portrayed and that it operates on a two-tiered Orwellian Animal Farm-style system where everyone is equal, but some more so than others.

When I decided to raise these points I did so because I knew it was the right thing to do, but it wasn’t an easy thing to do and it was not a decision I made lightly.

I knew that in raising my head above the parapet, despite having for the most part a positive experience while at the ABC, I was setting myself up to be someone else’s target practice. But I had to ask myself, if I didn’t stand up for what I believe in then when would I?

Interestingly the feedback from my story has been overwhelmingly positive. The only criticism I have faced is from the national broadcaster itself.

I have been inundated with responses from women and men who have said “well done” and “thank you for finally giving us a voice” because for many of the ABC’s staff they feel undervalued, overworked and underpaid. Sunday Life’s public celebration of this two-tiered system clearly rubbed salt into a very deep and long-standing wound for many who work at the ABC.

*Many have openly shared their stories of how they have been badly treated by a system that benefits the minority at the expense of the majority.

Stories such as the woman who, while she was going through a divorce and was looking after her small child, was given the only option to work very late shifts and was told to “suck it up” by her supervisor when she asked if she might be able to work hours more suitable to her needs.

I know of at least two cases where women were sacked while on maternity leave, one was told her position had been filled since she had “gone away” despite having her leave in writing. Another young woman rang me out of the blue to thank me profusely for speaking up. She detailed how she had been bullied by the dysfunctional culture of the ABC and had been traumatised. Despite the harassment she has suffered she still works there because she, like many, believes the service that the ABC provides to the Australian public is valuable even if the treatment of its staff, both women and men, is bad.

Some may think I’ve joined the ranks of the “ABC Haters Club” but that couldn’t be further from the truth. The reason I am speaking up is because there are many people, very good people, at the ABC who feel they can’t say anything for fear of retribution, as has been starkly communicated in the wake of my previous story.

Despite the systemic problems this is an opportunity for the ABC to take a step back and ask: How can we be better? How can we make our staff feel heard and feel valued? And I’m not talking about sending an all-network email full of hollow praise, I mean really uncovering how the systemic cultural problems can be fixed.

Mr Scott, this is the kind of feedback that many organisations pay thousands of dollars to obtain. I am providing it to you for free. This as an opportunity for you to address the internal culture of the corporation and not just from a numerical standpoint.

There is a systemic breakdown between the majority of ABC staff and how they interact with its management. In your last year as managing director perhaps you could change your legacy and be a leader for all ABC staff.

I’m sure the ABC’s silent majority would thank you.

Whitney Fitzsimmons is a former ABC TV News presenter and host of Business Today. She is a spokeswoman and director on the board of the 100% Project, which campaigns for equal representation of women and men at board and executive level across Australia.

*


----------



## Tisme (16 August 2015)

It's a disgrace that people shouldn't be 100% happy and 100% fufilled with their job, 100% of the time. Damn the ABC for being uncaring to the whinging staffers who probably do zip and collect a taxpayer income with OTT superannuation.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 August 2015)

Has Whitney's story anything to do with the ABC being "political", or is it just a management issue ?

It's a pity some staff are not being valued, but the Public Service is usually a reflection of their political bosses at the time.


----------



## noco (17 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Has Whitney's story anything to do with the ABC being "political", or is it just a management issue ?
> 
> It's a pity some staff are not being valued, but the Public Service is usually a reflection of their political bosses at the time.




Yes it is still political because if a staffer does not toe the line of the left, they are then bullied and intimidated until they leave.

Scott sacked a girl while she was on maternity leave even though she had her leave in writing.

*Many have openly shared their stories of how they have been badly treated by a system that benefits the minority at the expense of the majority.

Stories such as the woman who, while she was going through a divorce and was looking after her small child, was given the only option to work very late shifts and was told to “suck it up” by her supervisor when she asked if she might be able to work hours more suitable to her needs.

I know of at least two cases where women were sacked while on maternity leave, one was told her position had been filled since she had “gone away” despite having her leave in writing. Another young woman rang me out of the blue to thank me profusely for speaking up. She detailed how she had been bullied by the dysfunctional culture of the ABC and had been traumatised. Despite the harassment she has suffered she still works there because she, like many, believes the service that the ABC provides to the Australian public is valuable even if the treatment of its staff, both women and men, is bad.*


----------



## SirRumpole (17 August 2015)

Noco, the bit you quoted does not relate to politics, but work conditions. It sounds more like the conditions that Right Wing uncaring employers place on their staff, so maybe you should start thinking that the ABC is on your side.


----------



## wayneL (17 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Noco, the bit you quoted does not relate to politics, but work conditions. It sounds more like the conditions that Right Wing uncaring employers place on their staff, so maybe you should start thinking that the ABC is on your side.




A popular misconception Horace. Any employer with a profit motive wants maximum productivity from their people. It's a fact, in liberal western societies, a happy contented workplace is more productive. Only a fool would try to claim that every capitalist employer treats their staff well, but the smart ones do, and have better productivity for it.

It is more likely that highly regulated state and state sponsored employers (such as the ABC) have a poisonous work culture, because productivity is less of an issue than appeasing the political ideology of superiors.


----------



## Tisme (17 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> It is more likely that highly regulated state and state sponsored employers (such as the ABC) have a poisonous work culture, .




That's the tradeoff for effectively a (boring) job for life too,  I suppose.


----------



## Tisme (17 August 2015)

Did I miss the Ray Martin/Shaun Brown audit report? 

I see that SBS'  Michael Ebeid is considering producing the " Zaky Mallah" weekly "youth and current affairs" show.   That's gotta get under the skin of Tony A.


----------



## Tink (18 August 2015)

Good on Brendan O'Neill, a breath of fresh air on their ABC


----------



## Tink (18 August 2015)

_THE ABC last night screened an anti-Abbott Government attack ad during its high-rating and controversial television program Q&A.

The program, subject to boycott from Federal Government frontbenchers last month, aired a new CFMEU advertisement attacking the Royal Commission into trade union corruption and Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Host Tony Jones interrupted Liberal MP Kelly O’Dwyer to show the 30 second commercial._

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vi...ercial-during-qa/story-fni0fit3-1227487674691


----------



## dutchie (18 August 2015)

Tink said:


> _THE ABC last night screened an anti-Abbott Government attack ad during its high-rating and controversial television program Q&A._



_

What's the problem Tink, it's just paid political advertising._


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2015)

Tink said:


> Good on Brendan O'Neill, a breath of fresh air on their ABC




Yeah, he was one foot in each camp and exposed his nads in the process. Of course I liked his anti gay marriage, his anti social engineering stance, anti pandering to hurt feelings, pro common sense approaches.

I wanted to smack the steel blue face from the Labor pollie for being so rude to the woman guest next to him...and I wanted to dig a big hole and bury Kelly and the Greens idiot up to their necks in the BS they produce so prolifically.

I love watching QANDA when people have opposing views. I did like them scooping the union ad so we could get the snapshot of the different factional reactions of the politicians. We are all grown ups who watch that show, so we can navigate through any bias, which I still don't believe exists.

I wonder if VC watched it ... there were two pro gay questioners who felt it their duty to connect the dots between homosexual marriage and their own tortured souls. It was obviously a compelling case to support gay marriage e.g. it is much better than prostitution, drug addiction, neglect so it is therefore equal to a normal intact family environment...makes sense to me ( kinda like saying unroadworthy cars should be allowed on the road because they are better than a busted bicycle, plus they are cars too!)


----------



## noco (18 August 2015)

QandA...Plenty of Abbott bashing....plenty of anti RC into union corruption talk and how bad Dyson Heydon is but nothing about the union use of 457 visas to bring in overseas help for the unions.

What a farce this ABC is.


----------



## Tink (19 August 2015)

I rarely watch Q and A anymore, Tisme, but I did this week because I knew Katy Faust would be on, and with the week we have had, I was curious to see the outcome. 

I am glad I did, when I saw Media Watch beforehand, and all the censoring they have done, just disgraceful when we are suppose to live in a free country and we all pay for this public broadcaster. 
My first reaction was -- privatise it.
I don't think the majority should be paying for this.

I do agree with you, with what you said about Brendan, I feel he stole the show - good on him for standing up against the trolls that were on the bench from Labor and the Greens.
I don't agree with them viewing the commercial on the ABC, but as Kelly said, they both have their finger in the pie, the Greens and Labor, so of course they would be against it. 

If you are against this RC, you are against them all, which Brendan threw at them.

In my view, the best thing Tony Abbott did was stop going on the show to prove that they need to go by their charter, and that we all pay for that public broadcaster.
They talk about fairness but it is not really what they have been producing.

That has been the first time I have watched the show feeling that it was a bit of balance, apart from the commercial. That could also be that Brendan had a very strong personality, and if he wasn't on there, it would have been the same rubbish being thrown out.

Just a platform to push the Lefts agenda that the public pay for.
Many would be happy to come on the show but they don't allow it - only one version of what needs to be said on that show.

Though Brendan said some good things through the show, this stood out -- I think he is a Libertarian from and based in the UK

I have been told by the Liberals here, the reason they stood by marriage was because they took it to the election with a no change, and they were asked by their electorates to stand by what they voted for.


----------



## Tisme (19 August 2015)

Tink said:


> Though Brendan said some good things through the show, this stood out -- I think he is a Libertarian from and based in the UK






He's such a "last century" fella, is Brendan. This is the 21st century having passed through a magic door in Y2K to a land of rainbows, marshmellows, unicorns and toadstool houses. Brendan needs to get with the program.

I see we are about to be bombarded with a plethora of gay promotional films for Christmas....very timely and appropriately in theme with the birth of Jesus to a virgin mother impregnated by a vengeful God who destroys cities that wont stop playing with same sex pinky bits, animals, et al.

Not content controlling the courts, it makes me wonder why the Jews have such a fascination with promoting deviant behaviours through the ages and in the last century through their incestuous monopoly of film and media. I'm wondering if it's to give people a distraction from focusing on them as anti christs?


----------



## Logique (19 August 2015)

Tink said:


> ...In my view, the best thing Tony Abbott did was stop going on the show to prove that they need to go by their charter...
> 
> ...Though Brendan said some good things through the show, this stood out -- I think he is a Libertarian from and based in the UK...



The audience clapped this guy. The Q&A 'balanced audience'.

And predictably, the very next day in the Fairfax SMH, an article carving up panellists Brendan and Katy, the subliminal message to readers, 'this is what happens to heretics'.

Also I agree with the appearance embargo.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 August 2015)

Logique said:


> The audience clapped this guy. The Q&A 'balanced audience'.




Are you saying that you think that "Libertarian" and "Liberal" are two very different things ?


----------



## Logique (19 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Are you saying that you think that "Libertarian" and "Liberal" are two very different things ?



No I am not Sir R!  Just having a dig at the program's audience selection.  As one-time panellist Christopher Pyne said with heavy irony, 'how did they get in here'.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 August 2015)

Logique said:


> No I am not Sir R!  Just having a dig at the program's audience selection.  As one-time panellist Christopher Pyne said with heavy irony, 'how did they get in here'.




Sorry , I'm not quite with you.

You are upset that the audience clapped a man who was complaining that critics of gay marriage are shouted down by the "gay lobby" ?  (As I saw it he was offended that there was not a genuine discussion of the issue, but instead a shrill shouting campaign directed at anyone who opposes Gay Marriage.) 

If that's not the case I wonder what has offended you by the fact that Brendon O'Neill was applauded, and why you think that the people who applauded him in some way "should not have been allowed in" ?

Or am I missing a tongue in cheek attitude on your behalf ?


----------



## Logique (19 August 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> ...Or am I missing a tongue in cheek attitude on your behalf ?



Yes.  I was pleased at the applause for Brendan.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 August 2015)

Logique said:


> Yes.  I was pleased at the applause for Brendan.




Well in that case, "who let those people in ?"



I think he was right about "intimidation", although if he took a truly libertarian view, he would say that the government should not be interfering in the private lives of others. 

Gay Marriage is obviously a vexed issue for some people.


----------



## noco (24 August 2015)

Chris Kenny sums up the lies, the exaggeration and distortion of the facts by the ABC presenters..

The Fabians working at their best to discredit Abbott and his government...What a low lot they are.

Control the media and you control the people with false information and propaganda.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...rrect-falsehoods/story-fn8qlm5e-1227495563589

*The role of the host in a television discussion can be pretty fraught (yes, I know, my own efforts are a good training guide). But apart from keeping the conversation going, including all the guests and throwing to the topics and grabs, there is another responsibility.

It is vague, sure, because your guests are there to share their opinions but there is an onus, surely, to the truth, to the facts. When a guest makes a bald statement that is clearly incorrect there is a duty to pull them up, or at least air some dissent.

Now, granted you can’t be expected to pick up on every misstatement. You might have a director barking something in your earpiece at that instant or, more to the point, there are some guests who preach so much tosh you wouldn’t dare be rude enough to keep interrupting (yes, Julian Burnside, I am remembering a chat with you).

A week ago I watched former colleague Rebecca Weisser on ABC News 24 join a discussion with a trade union official about the political news of the day, including the Dyson Heydon controversy. The unionist (apologies — I don’t recall her name) was calling for the trade union royal commissioner to stand aside and said: “He’s gone to a Liberal Party fundraiser, it doesn’t matter whether it was raising any money or not, it was clearly a Liberal event.”

At the time I was staggered the hosts didn’t correct this blatant falsehood. They allowed her to finish and then left it to Weisser to point out that Heydon had done no such thing but, in fact, after initially accepting an invitation, had declined the speaking engagement.

News Corp columnist Andrew Bolt later revealed on his blog how the exchange was repeated on the ABC but in an edited version that excluded Weisser’s correction. That is a most unfortunate turn of events and I look forward to a full explanation on Media Watch tonight.

The Real Paul Barry might also explain why the very next day a similar howler was left unchallenged on Q&A. Greens leader Richard Di Natale was barely into his first breath on the same topic when he said: “You’ve got the fellow who is heading the Royal Commission now attending Liberal Party fundraisers.” Again we waited for the host to intervene. Tony Jones was mute. It was another most unfortunate turn of events.

As the former High Court justice considered the application against him over the weekend, we sincerely hope Heydon wasn’t swayed by the ABC’s falsehoods about his conduct. We should remind him that rather than deliver a prestigious legal lecture which would have done no harm and given no apprehension of bias, he actually declined to attend the said event in a diligent effort to ensure there could be no possible inference or suggestion of any apprehension of bias.

While on the issue of bias, let’s talk some more about the ABC and television hosts. At Sky News Australia, where I have a part-time job hosting Viewpoint twice a week, we put lots of opinion to air. But I think we do a pretty good job corralling it from the news.

Paul Murray, Richo,Kristina Keneally, Peter Van Onselen and I will happily air our views and those of our guests on the issues of the day, and our Canberra political reporters will be all over the issues with interviews and analysis. But in between we throw to regular news updates which aim to be straight and to the point, delivered by a stable of professional and objective newsreaders. Which is why there has been just a little muttering and murmuring over the past year or so as one of the part-time readers, Tracey Spicer, was becoming more and more opinionated in various online gigs and social media posts.

For instance, when Tony Abbott famously winked during a talkback radio call in Melbourne last year, Spicer tweeted a link to the footage with her comment: “Tony Abbott you are a disgusting creep.” And there was a piece for The Hoopla that was pushed on social media under the heading: “Tracey Spicer’s top 10 ways Tony Abbott is (with all due respect) f***ing it up.” The tone of that piece was best summarised in the line, “Pretty much everything you’ve touched is turning to sh*t.”

Now these views, if a little crass, are valid, for sure. But with such strong opinions out there from Spicer, it did seem a little weird once or twice when I finished an editorial giving my firm views on the politics of the day, then threw to Spicer for the “straight” take on the news. So you could imagine my surprise to hear she has left Sky News for another hosting opportunity. Good for her. But there is no prize for guessing where Spicer and her visceral Abbott-hating tweets and opinion pieces have been made to feel welcome, hosting political discussions ... yes, she’s been snapped up by their ABC.

*


----------



## Tink (24 August 2015)

Well said, noco


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2015)

noco said:


> *  When a guest makes a bald statement that is clearly incorrect there is a duty to pull them up, or at least air some dissent.
> 
> 
> *




I totally disagree with that. The show is supposed to be democracy in action, not censorship in action. If any guest wants to make a fool of himself, and let's face there are quite a few, that is their call. The other guests have the opportunity to debunk and then the vultures in the Newscorp media can have a crack in their blogs

Tony and Emma are the umpires and the main rule is open discussion.... not something far right and far left control freaks and their drones are comfortable with.

We are talking about a show for adults here, not a channel 10 gossip panel.


----------



## Tink (24 August 2015)

Well it has been censorship in action, Tisme, which was reported on MediaWatch, so I disagree with your comments.

Picking and choosing your guests on a stacked panel is not democracy.

Tony Jones is still a biased presenter, and it showed as clear as day the last show I saw.

Yes, Brendon O'Neill said some great things, the Godless Brit, and good on him, but he was quickly debunked, Tony Jones didn't like it.

You are entitled to your opinion, that is mine.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2015)

Tink said:


> Well it has been censorship in action, Tisme, which was reported on MediaWatch, so I disagree with your comments.
> 
> Picking and choosing your guests on a stacked panel is not democracy.
> 
> ...




I doubt Brendan could be debunked Tink. As much as I agreed with him, I too would argue him just because I like a good tÃªte-Ã -tÃªte, ... it doesn't mean I disagree just exploring the options with an intellect.

I seriously doubt anyone watching QANDA would be influenced away from their dogma unless there is a seriously good persuasive guest... the show is just too temporal to attract the knuckleheads. And I seriously do not detect bias of any consequence, but I'm on the record as a vocal opponent of the period when the topics were nothing but muslim, green, homosexual, welfare, boat people..... ad nauseam.

No one at the ABC twists the arms of the cult pulling power of Barnaby to come on an make fools of themselves. The media savvy senior pollies aren't that stupid.


----------



## Tink (24 August 2015)

We will have to agree to disagree on this one, Tisme.

The bias is very obvious, and as I said, I was glad that Tony Abbott stopped people on the show, time to go by their charter.

That girl, Katy Faust, came on that show to give her opinion and she was shouted down as hateful, for standing up for children -- they are just a pack of hypocrites and bullies.

You think children are going to open up and speak with attitudes like that.

Good on Brendan O'Neill, for showing it up, gay marriage, for the con that it is.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2015)

Tink said:


> We will have to agree to disagree on this one, Tisme.
> 
> The bias is very obvious, and as I said, I was glad that Tony Abbott stopped people on the show, time to go by their charter.
> 
> ...




I think I agree with you on more things of import than politics ... remember I am very ambivalent about political  parties, so I don't take offence when any of their own get the rounds of the table for being stupid or cute as a fox.

Rumpole and I are old hacks from the QANDA board and we have a pretty good compass on the bias. The amount of b1tching and moaning about the umpiring was fairly even week to week.


----------



## Tisme (25 August 2015)

LOL:

 @AbbottLovesAnal. instead of #AbbottLovesAnnabel  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2015/08/25/abc-qanda-apology-to-pm-_n_8034598.html


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> LOL:
> 
> @AbbottLovesAnal. instead of #AbbottLovesAnnabel
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2015/08/25/abc-qanda-apology-to-pm-_n_8034598.html




How can you possibly see the funny side of all this....Abbott should sue the ABC for trying to defame him.

If that tweet had been directed at Bill Shorten there would have been hell to play

The ABC are lower than rattlesnakes belly for allowing such obscenity and while Malcolmn Turnbull is there as Minister for communications, he will do nothing about it for it suits him to see Tony Abbott being discredited.

I would not be surprised if Turnbull is  Fabian....He is more suited to a shadow Minister in the LUG party. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ll_seem_about_the_abcs_latest_anti_abbott_sl/


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

I couldn't care less who the poor sap was that was unfortunate to be on the receiving end, it would still be funny. 

I'm sure if it was Bill Shorten you'd be upending your tea and scones while clapping hysterically with approval.


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> I couldn't care less who the poor sap was that was unfortunate to be on the receiving end, it would still be funny.
> 
> I'm sure if it was Bill Shorten you'd be upending your tea and scones while clapping hysterically with approval.




You are sooooooo wrong...I would not wish that crap on anyone no matter who he is........It is as bad as the ABC with that sick $hit on Chris Kenny having sex with a dog.

There is no need for this type of reporting and the ABC are getting away with too much.

Put yourself in their shoes.....Would you think it was funny then if the ABC said you (that is  if you were someone well known) were an off spring of a Gorilla?

Time to get rid of Mark Scott...he is mentally deranged.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 August 2015)

Q&A should get rid of tweets completely, they are just a distraction.


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

noco said:


> Put yourself in their shoes.....Would you think it was funny then if the ABC said you (that is  if you were someone well known) were an off spring of a Gorilla?
> 
> .




You obviously haven't seen my twitter account  

How could Tony sue anyone about anal sex, he's about to go to a plebiscite to get approval for it's constitutional approval. He can hardly be asking for an apology when it's acceptable to the majority (if you ask the rainbow brigade). If anything he should be proud and loud at being enjoined as one of the boys.


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> You obviously haven't seen my twitter account
> 
> How could Tony sue anyone about anal sex, he's about to go to a plebiscite to get approval for it's constitutional approval. He can hardly be asking for an apology when it's acceptable to the majority (if you ask the rainbow brigade). If anything he should be proud and loud at being enjoined as one of the boys.




Your reply does not answer my question about your good self.


----------



## wayneL (31 August 2015)

A







SirRumpole said:


> Q&A should get rid of tweets completely, they are just a distraction.




Agreed. Oxygen for trolls imo


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

noco said:


> Your reply does not answer my question about your good self.




water off a duck's back Noco ... of course I'd laugh ... I'm not that unAustralian as to have such a thin skin.... our culture is based on taking the proverbial and not getting ahead of one's self...... or don't you remember the years before PC invaded our fair shores?


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> A
> 
> Agreed. Oxygen for trolls imo




You think they are real? I must admit I hardly read them, but someone must for the #abbott tweet to make its way to the headlines.


----------



## wayneL (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> water off a duck's back Noco ... of course I'd laugh ... I'm not that unAustralian as to have such a thin skin.... our culture is based on taking the proverbial and not getting ahead of one's self...... or don't you remember the years before PC invaded our fair shores?




Its the double standard tisme.

You cant have the faux outrage industry running concurrently with taking the p1ss without folks noticing the monumental hypocrisy


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> water off a duck's back Noco ... of course I'd laugh ... I'm not that unAustralian as to have such a thin skin.... our culture is based on taking the proverbial and not getting ahead of one's self...... or don't you remember the years before PC invaded our fair shores?




I find that hard to believe.


----------



## overhang (31 August 2015)

noco said:


> You are sooooooo wrong...I would not wish that crap on anyone no matter who he is........It is as bad as the ABC with that sick $hit on Chris Kenny having sex with a dog.
> 
> There is no need for this type of reporting and the ABC are getting away with too much.
> 
> ...




Hang on there political crusader, where was your outrage when Abbott stood behind the ditch the witch and Juliar Bob Browns bitch signs?


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

wayneL said:


> Its the double standard tisme.
> 
> You cant have the faux outrage industry running concurrently with taking the p1ss without folks noticing the monumental hypocrisy




Very true Wayne, the indignation brigade are a pestilence in my opinion.



			
				Noco said:
			
		

> I find that hard to believe.




That's no surprise Noco, but it isn't rooted in fact. Why would I care if someone wanted to have some fun with what is mainstream social media humour these days.... they aren't doing anything but showing how quick witted they are; the target is the audience approval, the supposed victim is merely the prop.


----------



## Tisme (31 August 2015)

overhang said:


> Hang on there political crusader, where was your outrage when Abbott stood behind the ditch the witch and Juliar Bob Browns bitch signs?




Did Andrew Bolt disapprove?


----------



## overhang (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> Did Andrew Bolt disapprove?




He was probably holding the sign


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

overhang said:


> Hang on there political crusader, where was your outrage when Abbott stood behind the ditch the witch and Juliar Bob Browns bitch signs?




Abbott was actually in front of the that sign and was obviously not aware of it...This is exactly how you lefties and the ABC exaggerate things and throw it all out of context....Someone with a grudge against Gillard and Brown most likely took in their own hands to display that particular sign.

Are you trying to blame Abbott for that sign....Give me a break.


----------



## noco (31 August 2015)

Tisme said:


> Did Andrew Bolt disapprove?




He probably did......I will do some back tracking for you.


----------



## overhang (31 August 2015)

noco said:


> Abbott was actually in front of the that sign and was obviously not aware of it...This is exactly how you lefties and the ABC exaggerate things and throw it all out of context....Someone with a grudge against Gillard and Brown most likely took in their own hands to display that particular sign.
> 
> Are you trying to blame Abbott for that sign....Give me a break.




You cannot be that naive, Abbotts campaign managers would have positioned him in front of those signs to maximise the shock value of the carbon tax, they or he greatly misjudged the fallout though.  Personally I dont think it was that big of a deal but a clear error of judgement, one of many for Abbott.


----------



## sptrawler (31 August 2015)

overhang said:


> You cannot be that naive, Abbotts campaign managers would have positioned him in front of those signs to maximise the shock value of the carbon tax, they or he greatly misjudged the fallout though.  Personally I dont think it was that big of a deal but a clear error of judgement, one of many for Abbott.




Just scroll back through the last 10 posts, and all you are doing, is bullying noco. you really are dicks.

Let's compare Abbott standing innocuosly in front of a sign, compared to the so called "witch" sicking the protesters onto Abbott.

Which backfired big time, and Gillard had to be lugged into the car, what a hoot, another Labor FF up.

But it was great T.V.

FW's led by FW's


----------



## overhang (31 August 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Just scroll back through the last 10 posts, and all you are doing, is bullying noco. you really are dicks.
> 
> Let's compare Abbott standing innocuosly in front of a sign, compared to the so called "witch" sicking the protesters onto Abbott.
> Which backfired big time, and Gillard had to be lugged into the car, what a hoot, another Labor FF up.
> ...




Perhaps you should toughen up if you think that's bullying, fair dinkum this is the exact sort of PC nonsense that lead to the outrage over the ditch the witch and now the Q&A tweet


----------



## sptrawler (1 September 2015)

overhang said:


> Perhaps you should toughen up if you think that's bullying, fair dinkum this is the exact sort of PC nonsense that lead to the outrage over the ditch the witch and now the Q&A tweet




No problem with me toughening up princess, grew up in mining towns since 1968, just trying to cut noco a bit of slack.


----------



## overhang (1 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> No problem with me toughening up princess, grew up in mining towns since 1968, just trying to cut noco a bit of slack.




You could have fooled me, picked you more as inner city type but each to their own.


----------



## sptrawler (1 September 2015)

overhang said:


> You could have fooled me, picked you more as inner city type but each to their own.




Yep just because I'm soft and cuddly, doesn't mean I haven't lost my front teeth, a fractured skull and had 60 stitches in my face. 

But I still don't like people being picked on.


----------



## Tink (1 September 2015)

I agree, noco.

_What classy, professional folks that work at “our” ABC. So hate-filled are they, that any gutter crap will be given free run – as long as Abbott is crucified

Rita Panahi was spot on when she wrote:
*
ABC Q&A ‘accidents’ only vilify one side of politics*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...side-of-politics/story-e6frg6n6-1227498392096

Here we go again. The genius crew at the helm of the ABC’s flagship program, Q&A, have yet again covered themselves in ignominy. The decision to broadcast a tweet from an account with a highly offensive handle was either a malicious act of bastardry designed to embarrass Prime Minister Tony Abbott or simply due to gross ineptitude.
You can never be sure with the ABC but it’s remarkable that the lapses, factual errors and unfortunate “accidents” that occur with regular monotony on the behemoth’s many platforms tend to vilify only one side of politics.
Less than three weeks since the Prime Minister lifted a ban on government front benchers appearing on the program, the ideologues at the helm of Q&A have shown they’ve learnt nothing from the Zaky Mallah saga. Hapless CEO Mark Scott was once more left to apologise for the conduct of an organisation that has become a law unto itself.
______

The simple truth is the ABC is absolutely crawling with Abbott-haters, and they will seek to get away with any vile attack they can, all the while living the good life off our tax dollars. And that the ABC is crawling with lefties, Labor supporters, and anti-Abbott is not mere speculation.

“Why does the Left media protect the left?”
Because the political commentators of the Left media are either intermingled or married to the left politicians. 
It’s a family thing and they protect their own.
Greg Combet (Labor) partnered to Juanita Phillips (ABC).
Gai Brodtmann (Labor) married to Chris Uhlmann (ABC).
David Feeney (Labor) married to Liberty Sanger (guest commentator on ABC).
Barry Cassidy (ABC) former speech writer for Bob Hawke (Labor) from 1986-1991 married to Heather Ewart (ABC).
Maxine McKew (ABC) married to Bob Hogg (former ALP national secretary).
Virginia Trioli (ABC) married to Russell Skelton (The Age).
Mark Kenny (Fairfax) married to Virginia Haussegger (ABC).
And so the list goes on.

Labor, Fairfax and the ABC are joined at the hip.
Much like the relationship between Labor and the unions.
Why do they protect Burke where they savage Bishop?
They’re just looking after the family………….(wearing “I’ll ride with Burke” T-shirts.)

Of course. They already stack their audiences with their buddies, they take video questions and comments from their buddies, and they stack the panels of their shows with their buddies. What bias?

There is no reason in the world why taxpayers must subsidise this gross and appalling bias. De-fund now._


----------



## noco (1 September 2015)

overhang said:


> You cannot be that naive, Abbotts campaign managers would have positioned him in front of those signs to maximise the shock value of the carbon tax, they or he greatly misjudged the fallout though.  Personally I dont think it was that big of a deal but a clear error of judgement, one of many for Abbott.




That is your opinion...do you have proof?

Put or shut up.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

Tink said:


> There is no reason in the world why taxpayers must subsidise this gross and appalling bias. De-fund now.[/I]




I suppose that sort of denigration of the ABC may appeal to the rusted on Right Wing tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts, but the majority of the population want a broadcaster that looks into areas that the Liberal party's propaganda wing (ie the Murdoch tabloids) won't go, and they find the ABC a valuable source of information and alternative views. 

The Abbott government is the government, they deserve to have their actions properly investigated, and the ABC gave as much heat to the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments when they were in power.


----------



## wayneL (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I suppose that sort of denigration of the ABC may appeal to the rusted on Right Wing tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts, but the majority of the population want a broadcaster that looks into areas that the Liberal party's propaganda wing (ie the Murdoch tabloids) won't go, and they find the ABC a valuable source of information and alternative views.
> 
> The Abbott government is the government, they deserve to have their actions properly investigated, and the ABC gave as much heat to the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments when they were in power.




Do the pejoratives indicate a lack of substance there Horace?

And BTW the Murdoch press have been upping Abbott for the rent too.

The fact remains that the ABC is using tactics against Abbott et al based mostly on psychology rather than substance. 

We shouldn't give a rat's whether Abbot winked, or Hockey smoked a cigar, we should focus on how they're running the country and the alternatives offered should there be an election.... dispassionately.

That's not what we're getting from the ABC, we're getting subtle campaigning for the Labor/Green Axis.


----------



## noco (1 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Just scroll back through the last 10 posts, and all you are doing, is bullying noco. you really are dicks.
> 
> Let's compare Abbott standing innocuosly in front of a sign, compared to the so called "witch" sicking the protesters onto Abbott.
> 
> ...




Thanks for your support SP.

This is how the Fabians operate...If you don't agree with them, they will ridicule and discredit a person where ever they can.....This is their modus operandi.

It is also well known, and recently revealed, that  there are over 75% LUG staff working for the ABC and Fairfax. 

The ideology of the Fabians is to control the media in order to brainwash the naive with their socialistic propaganda.......Criticize a conservative government and discredit its leaders at every possible opportunity.... They pick up anything that may be adverse on the Abbott government and they will exaggerate to make it look worse and if they don't have something to use they will make it up via the back door leftist media.

What a grotty lot.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

> And BTW the Murdoch press have been upping Abbott for the rent too.




Well that probably indicates that even their supporters think the Abbott government are hopeless. 

So what people may consider to be "attacks" on the Abbott government is simply genuine reporting of their failures and incompetence.

The ABC didn't do the Labor party any favours with their stupid "At home with Julia" series or "The Killing Season", so some people have to suck up reporting of the current government in the same vein.


----------



## noco (1 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> No problem with me toughening up princess, grew up in mining towns since 1968, just trying to cut noco a bit of slack.




I cut my teeth in South West Queensland on sheep station in the 40's and 50's.

We used to knit with barb wire and grow prickly pear on our chests.

Go into the local pub after a hard days work and drink beer from a 5 gallon keg up on the counter with a wet bag over the top to keep it cool....No electricity.....and the best part of those days there was no TV and one did not have to watch the BULL $HIT that we have to tolerate today

We used to work 7 days a week and no bloody penalty rates......Most on this site would not know what a fair days work is....all they think about is how can I cheat the boss to work less for more pay.

Most of the blokes and gals on this site have never had so good.


----------



## noco (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well that probably indicates that even their supporters think the Abbott government are hopeless.
> 
> So what people may consider to be "attacks" on the Abbott government is simply genuine reporting of their failures and incompetence.
> 
> The ABC didn't do the Labor party any favours with their stupid "At home with Julia" series or "The Killing Season", so some people have to suck up reporting of the current government in the same vein.




And of course you think your beloved LUG party will do better......They don't have a very good history of fiscal management ...something you cannot deny.


----------



## wayneL (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well that probably indicates that even their supporters think the Abbott government are hopeless.
> 
> So what people may consider to be "attacks" on the Abbott government is simply genuine reporting of their failures and incompetence.
> 
> The ABC didn't do the Labor party any favours with their stupid "At home with Julia" series or "The Killing Season", so some people have to suck up reporting of the current government in the same vein.




You've deflected my point. But you know that don't you? The issue is not whether the ABC is reporting on issues, good or bad, it is intentionally white anting via puerile sleights they know will influence the unthinking plebeians.

But you know that as well.


----------



## noco (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I suppose that sort of denigration of the ABC may appeal to the rusted on Right Wing tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nuts, but the majority of the population want a broadcaster that looks into areas that the Liberal party's propaganda wing (ie the Murdoch tabloids) won't go, and they find the ABC a valuable source of information and alternative views.
> 
> The Abbott government is the government, they deserve to have their actions properly investigated, and the ABC gave as much heat to the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments when they were in power.




Here we go again.....more character assassination......Typical of the Fabians....Their motto is if you can't win fair, play foul.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

noco said:


> > Originally Posted by sptrawler  View Post
> > No problem with me toughening up princess, grew up in mining towns since 1968, just trying to cut noco a bit of slack.
> 
> 
> ...




You guys are pussies ... I was knuckling seven yearolds when I was six, I could walk and fart at the same time when I was eight, by the time I was eleven I was scarifying paddocks for cropping on a Fordson tractor with no power brakes nor power steering, driving a Bedford truck top dressing, mulesing and crutching sheep at twelve, fencing, giving lip to shearers while throwing, skirting then pressing bales, shooting roos and rabbits, drinking a whole 600ml coke in one breath, but then came the real test of stamina ..... women!!!!


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well that probably indicates that even their supporters think the Abbott government are hopeless.
> 
> .




I think it's more to do with Murdoch having a secret squirrel meeting with Hockey. Abbott and Coy have responded by seeking to remove Hockey surreptitiously.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> You've deflected my point. But you know that don't you? The issue is not whether the ABC is reporting on issues, good or bad, it is intentionally white anting via puerile sleights they know will influence the unthinking plebeians.
> 
> But you know that as well.




Responding to Dutton's earlier radio interview, Josh Fry. was given the opportunity to explain what bias was being provided by the ABC this morning on ABC TV and he came up blank. One would think if you are going to have a pommy like whinge you would have the gun locked and loaded.

I thought we were supposed to have grown people running the country, not whiney kids like we find on so many message boards.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

noco said:


> Here we go again.....more character assassination......Typical of the Fabians....Their motto is if you can't win fair, play foul.




So far no Fabians have tried it on with me Noco. You can stand in my shadow if you like and I'll take the hits, which should just bounce off my chest like Superman and bullets.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> The issue is not whether the ABC is reporting on issues, good or bad, it is intentionally white anting via puerile sleights they know will influence the unthinking plebeians.




Any biased person may come to that conclusion. If a media outlet does not blatantly say "The Liberal Party is doing a good job and should be re-elected", then they are obviously biased against the Liberal Party.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

noco said:


> And of course you think your beloved LUG party will do better......They don't have a very good history of fiscal management ...something you cannot deny.




Unlike Hockey who has managed to double the deficit in two years.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

noco said:


> T
> 
> It is also well known, and recently revealed, that  there are over 75% LUG staff working for the ABC and Fairfax.




I take it LUG is some kind of acronym for Labor and Greens members? That's some kind of branch stacking right there. I didn't know there were that many paid up members in all the parties combined in Australia !!!

I do recall there was a fairly even voting intention among union members, Liberal/Labor in a survey a few years back. I guess some people can distinguish between job security/satisfaction/power in numbers and business of govt?


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

So I looked up memberships:
 approximate of course

Libs 50,000
Labs 40,000
Greens 10,000


Cripes that's only 100k, the Melbourne cricket club has more than that and another 200,00 waiting to get in! No wonder the 2,000,000 trade union members get a bit miffed at the other 50,000 sticking their noses in.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> So I looked up memberships:
> approximate of course
> 
> Libs 50,000
> ...




Yes, it's pretty pathetic membership for all parties

Getup claims 600,000 + but I find that hard to believe, and it's not a party anyway.


----------



## awg (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> The fact remains that the ABC is using tactics against Abbott et al based mostly on psychology rather than substance.
> 
> We shouldn't give a rat's whether Abbot winked, or Hockey smoked a cigar, we should focus on how they're running the country and the alternatives offered should there be an election.... dispassionately.
> 
> That's not what we're getting from the ABC, we're getting subtle campaigning for the Labor/Green Axis.




It seems to me the "ABC" and some Libs are now waging a war of extermination upon each other, human nature being as it is, if I was an ABC employee, I would be fighting with all I could muster against a govt that is obviously bent on reducing them. One would imagine relations between Mark Scott and Govt would be poor.
It seems they would sack him in an instant if they could.

I doubt the dodgy tweet handle would be a deliberate slight though, as the operator that allowed that would know such a slip-up in these times would result in discipline or dismissal


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

If you want to talk of ABC bias, there were three Federal Ministers on ABC Breakfast this morning (Dutton, Freidenberg and Morrison) and NO Labor spokesmen.

NOW THAT'S BIAS


----------



## dutchie (1 September 2015)

awg said:


> I doubt the dodgy tweet handle would be a deliberate slight though, as the operator that allowed that would know such a slip-up in these times would result in discipline or dismissal




Discipline or dismiss him/her ?  That's not how their ABC work.

They would more likely give them a party and promote them.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

dutchie said:


> Discipline or dismiss him/her ?  That's not how their ABC work.
> 
> They would more likely give them a party and promote them.




That would be admitting homophobia ... can't do that.


----------



## dutchie (1 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> That would be admitting homophobia ... can't do that.




????????


----------



## overhang (1 September 2015)

noco said:


> That is your opinion...do you have proof?
> 
> Put or shut up.




Most of this thread is all opinion based.

But if we look at the actual facts then we know that the ABC is the most trusted news outlet in the country (http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/12/18...telegraph-takes-a-hit/?wpmp_switcher=mobile)-) , we know that Leigh Sales has been cleared by the independent watchdog twice for her interview of Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey in his post budget interview.  We know that a study to measure media slant actually demonstrated that the ABC has a slight bias towards the coalition.(http://www.andrewleigh.org/pdf/MediaSlant.pdf)  

Now onto your continual assertion that the majority of the ABC staff vote greens or labor, the poll conducted included only 34 ABC journalists which is an incredibly small sample size with large room for error considering the ABC employs over 4500.  There is no way you can conclude that the majority of ABC staff lean a certain way based from that poll but I know you'll continue to attack the ABC and won't drop this but this is why people don't accept your assertion.


----------



## wayneL (1 September 2015)

Crikey overhang!

Crikey.com is overtly left biased. I would never expect an unbiased piece on bias from a biased source. 

Look, I can say something like "Abbott plays tiddleywinks" and depending on my tone and body language, can cause that to sound positive, neutral or negative.

It's all context. The ABC is usually clever enough to use that.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> Crikey overhang!
> 
> Crikey.com is overtly left biased. I would never expect an unbiased piece on bias from a biased source.
> 
> ...




Perhaps you would like to point out any part of the Australian media that IS NOT biased in any way ?


----------



## overhang (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> Crikey overhang!
> 
> Crikey.com is overtly left biased. I would never expect an unbiased piece on bias from a biased source.
> 
> ...




Indeed it is Wayne but if you could point me to a non biased media news outlet then by all means please do but I wasn't referring to the editorial piece but rather the data from the essential polling that the article contained.  I don't think you'll find these results in any news corp piece as it doesn't bode well for them. If you have something that disproves this poll to discredit the article then by all means post it.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

dutchie said:


> ????????




Connect the dots.


----------



## dutchie (1 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Connect the dots.





That would be admitting homophobia __ can't do that.


----------



## Tisme (1 September 2015)

dutchie said:


> That would be admitting homophobia __ can't do that.




  I like that


----------



## wayneL (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Perhaps you would like to point out any part of the Australian media that IS NOT biased in any way ?




The ABC is the only bias denier


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> The ABC is the only bias denier




It's the only media outlet to submit to independent reviews which have cleared them of bias.


----------



## sails (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It's the only media outlet to submit to independent reviews which have cleared them of bias.




SR, how would you feel if the ABC were politically biased heavily to the right?  How would you feel if Q&A had around 5 liberal supporters and one labor supporter and gotcha questions to ridicule labor?  How would you feel if most of the discussion was anti-labor/ pro-liberal with very little counter views from labor people?

If you are a taxpayer paying for the ABC, I would imagine you would not be happy...


I'm not sure if their "independent" reviewers are unbiased.  ABC's last choice of Ray Martin says it all, imo.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 September 2015)

sails said:


> SR, how would you feel if the ABC were politically biased heavily to the right?  How would you feel if Q&A had around 5 liberal supporters and one labor supporter and gotcha questions to ridicule labor?  How would you feel if most of the discussion was anti-labor/ pro-liberal with very little counter views from labor people?




I would call it News Ltd.


----------



## awg (1 September 2015)

dutchie said:


> Discipline or dismiss him/her ?  That's not how their ABC work.
> 
> They would more likely give them a party and promote them.




If they are still covered by the Public Service Act, in any case such as this, 
(public stuff-up)...an internal investigation is convened, and an outcome recommended.
The Act defines this process.

If the operator made even a simple excusable mistake, they would still probably receive an official warning.
Not a very just or enjoyable experience for anyone subject to it when I was a Public Servant.

ps. causing yours "bosses" to look like an ass in public is not a winner...no different to private enterprise really


----------



## sails (1 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I would call it News Ltd.




I doubt you would be happy about that even if "independent" reviewers stated they were not biased at all...

How the ABC can pretend they are not biased in their political programs is beyond stupid.  And Turnbull is only showing his labor/green leanings by doing nothing about it.  He is clearly not suitable for Liberal leadership when he can't manage to bring in some necessary balance in his own portfolio, imo.


----------



## sptrawler (2 September 2015)

This commentator explains the situation with reporters very well.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-02/barnes-does-dutton-have-a-point-about-media-bias/6742332


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

The ABC are becoming lower by the day...The ABC is a national disgrace for not allowing the airing of the Prime Ministers speech at his own literary rewards.

Both Turnbull and Scott should be sacked.

It is the Fabians at work at their best.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...513600448?sv=e22ae3cef05dbd00ea8ddf2f7a240028

*The ABC has used its editorial independence charter as a *reason for refusing to broadcast live a literary speech by Tony Abbott — at the Prime Minister’s Literary Awards.

The broadcaster was unwilling to air Mr Abbott’s speech at the awards, one of the nation’s richest literary events, and yet was happy to allow the prize-winning authors to speak live and unedited.

Australian Publishers Association president Louise Adler, the event’s organiser, has revealed that negotiations with the ABC broke down irreconcilably last year because the broadcaster was unwilling to show Mr *Abbott’s speech.

“The ABC refused to broadcast the PM’s speech, which was going to be about seven minutes,” Ms Adler told The Weekend Australian.

“What was puzzling was the ABC’s willingness to broadcast unedited the prize-winning *writers’ speeches but not the Prime Minister of the day.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
*
    MoreScott’s wife in cancer fight

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

“What if a writer had said something defamatory? One can’t but deduce that the national broadcaster was making a political judgment rather than an editorial judgment.”

The ABC’s stance stands in contrast to the corporation’s willingness to give convicted criminal and terrorist sympathiser Zaky Mallah a national platform on its Q&A show.

Instead, Sky and SBS televised the awards, in December last year, with managing directors Angelos Frangopoulos and Michael Ebeid agreeing to broadcast the event live and without alterations.

Ms Adler, the chief executive of Melbourne University Publishing, said there were many other forums on the ABC where citizens were given a live and unedited platform.

“When I go on Q&A, ABC management have no idea what I’m going to say,” she said.

“This is the Prime Minister’s Literary Awards and he intended to make a significant speech in support of Australian writing and writers.

“Isn’t celebrating our literary culture part of the ABC’s brief? It was a very disappointing response.”

The Prime Minister was more than willing to compromise on the length of his speech, if seven minutes was deemed too long, she said.

She also clarified that it was not Mr Abbott’s request to have his speech televised live, but part of the project team’s efforts to ensure the awards became a major event that captured the public’s attention.

In Britain, the Man Booker Prize is broadcast on the BBC and is supported by all publishers, booksellers and the print and electronic media, which promote the long-list and the short-list of finalists to the community. It is an event that engages the public and promotes literature.

“The BBC is the television partner for the Man Booker Awards; we naturally would assume the ABC, our national broadcaster, would be the appropriate partner for the PM’s literary awards,” she said.

During the negotiations, Ms Adler said she made the point that the event was scheduled for early December, a time when many ABC programs take a break.

“But the ABC’s response was that they didn’t want to broadcast the event in its entirety because it wasn’t going to make good television,” she said.

“I suggested they look at the BBC broadcast of the Man Booker announcement at Guildhall. It’s not MasterChef, we’re not talking about millions of eyeballs and we weren’t asking for it to go to air at 7pm during a ratings period.”

ABC management was prepared to run the event as a package during an episode of The Book Club, where producers would decide which comments to air from Mr Abbott’s speech.

Sky and SBS collaborated to broadcast the event live on each network.

They will do so again when this year’s awards are held next month.

The awards, established by Kevin Rudd, were used by Mr Abbott to announce a new Australian Book Council to promote reading.

At the awards night, held in Melbourne, guests on the head table included Mr Abbott, his chief-of-staff Peta Credlin, Dymocks’ managing director Steve Cox, The Herald and Weekly Times’ board chairwoman Penny Fowler and Mr Ebeid.

Ms Adler has published books by politicians from all sides of parliament, including by Mr Abbott.

The ABC did not respond to request for comment.

*Read the 200 odd comments which none favour the ABC.*


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> The ABC are becoming lower by the day...The ABC is a national disgrace for not allowing the airing of the Prime Ministers speech at his own literary rewards.
> 
> [/U][/B]




Did any other broadcasters televise the speech ?

The ABC can't broadcast every speech by every politician. The Literary Awards are hardly an event of national importance. Maybe if he was going to say something about the economy or defence, but otherwise everyone would be bored stiff.


No big deal.


----------



## Tisme (5 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Did any other broadcasters televise the speech ?
> 
> *The ABC can't broadcast every speech by every politician.* The Literary Awards are hardly an event of national importance. Maybe if he was going to say something about the economy or defence, but otherwise everyone would be bored stiff.
> 
> ...




If Andrew Bolt says it should then the ABC has a duty to obey.

Of course the LNP have literary coursing through their veins: 

http://www.news.com.au/national/que...y-literary-award/story-e6frfkvr-1226317911447


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Of course the LNP have literary coursing through their veins:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/que...y-literary-award/story-e6frfkvr-1226317911447




Yes indeed, maybe the only books they read are their own


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Did any other broadcasters televise the speech ?
> 
> The ABC can't broadcast every speech by every politician. The Literary Awards are hardly an event of national importance. Maybe if he was going to say something about the economy or defence, but otherwise everyone would be bored stiff.
> 
> ...




Rumpy to the rescue again of the Fabian indoctrinated ABC.

*“The ABC refused to broadcast the PM’s speech, which was going to be about seven minutes,” Ms Adler told The Weekend Australian.

“What was puzzling was the ABC’s willingness to broadcast unedited the prize-winning *writers’ speeches but not the Prime Minister of the day.


*
The ABC was quite willing to broadcast, unedited, the prize winning "writers" speech but the Abbott haters denied the Prime Minister the privilege....What a crumby lot they are and you and the ABC say they are not biased.

The ABC bias sticks out the dog's perverbials and they continue to do it with the full knowledge of the public..


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> Rumpy to the rescue again of the Fabian indoctrinated ABC.
> 
> *“The ABC refused to broadcast the PM’s speech, which was going to be about seven minutes,” Ms Adler told The Weekend Australian.
> 
> ...




Noco, it's the prize winners who did all the effing work to get their awards, the PM is just there to hand them out.

It's the prize winners night, not his, we can get a gutfull of him any time we like.


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Noco, it's the prize winners who did all the effing work to get their awards, the PM is just there to hand them out.
> 
> It's the prize winners night, not his, we can get a gutfull of him any time we like.




Rumpy, you have just confirmed you are an Abbott hater and a Fabian sympathizer and you are quite happy to sit there an listen to a corrupt man who wants to be our next Prime Minister, who waffles on and then is able to contradict himself 9 seconds later....He did not know the difference between a Sub Way shop and a 7 Eleven outlet.

You have a man who who stabbed two Prime Ministers in the back within 3 years......Mate what ever you do, do not turn back on Bill Shorten......He turned his back on the Chiquita and Clean Event workers....He ( Shorten) is now trying to turn his back on workers over the CHAFTA.....I think a lot of the public have had a gutfull of the man who wants to be the next Prime Minister......A man who cannot be trusted so long as he is running around and bowing to the CFMEU.....They call and Billy Boy comes running......Even 7 or 8 leading true ALP statesmen think Shorten is a D*** head and should divorce himself from the CFMEU......This union and the TURC will be Shortens down fall.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...en-comes-running/story-fni0ffxg-1227509956379


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> Rumpy, you have just confirmed you are an Abbott hater and a Fabian sympathizer and you are quite happy to sit there an listen to a corrupt man who wants to be our next Prime Minister, who waffles on and then is able to contradict himself 9 seconds later....He did not know the difference between a Sub Way shop and a 7 Eleven outlet.
> 
> You have a man who who stabbed two Prime Ministers in the back within 3 years......Mate what ever you do, do not turn back on Bill Shorten......He turned his back on the Chiquita and Clean Event workers....He ( Shorten) is now trying to turn his back on workers over the CHAFTA.....I think a lot of the public have had a gutfull of the man who wants to be the next Prime Minister......A man who cannot be trusted so long as he is running around and bowing to the CFMEU.....They call and Billy Boy comes running......Even 7 or 8 leading true ALP statesmen think Shorten is a D*** head and should divorce himself from the CFMEU......This union and the TURC will be Shortens down fall.
> 
> ...




*But the most sinister sign of Shorten’s capture by union heavies is his campaign to smear former High Court judge Dyson Heydon, head of the royal commission into union corruption. Shorten derides this distinguished jurist as “Tony Abbott’s captain’s pick”, so biased that he must be sacked.

Heydon’s crime? To have accepted an invitation from Liberal lawyers to give an annual law lecture, only to pull out when it was sold as a Liberal function.

But on Monday Heydon turned down union demands that he resign.

He noted the same lecture was given last year by former High Court chief justice Murray Gleeson and even the ACTU’s barrister had admitted that “I don’t think anyone would dare suggest what way his political leanings bend”.

So why, asked Heydon, did unions now claim to know his own leanings? Why conclude that he couldn’t put any presumed leanings aside and judge on the facts and the law?

And how could his presumed leanings affect the job he was actually doing — making sure union officials were honest? Hadn’t the ACTU also agreed that it wasn’t saying Heydon was in fact biased?

Yet Shorten is still planning to ask the Senate on Monday to petition Governor-General Sir Peter Cosgrove to sack this corruption buster. Would Shorten have dared to involve his mother-in-law in this grotesque protection racket when she was governor-general?

But no wonder Shorten is so desperate. First, Heydon is investigating deals Shorten struck as head of the Australian Workers Union, which cut workers’ entitlements but had employers donate to the AWU. In one deal, an employer even paid $40,000 for Shorten’s personal benefit.

Second, Heydon is on the tail of crooked union officials, especially in the CFMEU. Already 26 union officials past and present have been recommended for charges.

Again, conservatives aren’t alone in being shocked that Shorten is protecting union crooks. Yet another former ACTU president, Martin Ferguson, says he “will not damn” a royal commission that “is potentially going to be very important in reforming the trade union movement and the Labor Party”. And Ferguson, a former Labor minister, warned that too many MPs now “wait for the phone call from the trade union heavy to tell them what to do”.

Should such a party really be trusted with the government of this country? Should Shorten?

*


----------



## Tisme (5 September 2015)

Isn't the PMs Literary Award a load of cash given to Liberal Party sympathisers as judged by Liberal Party sympathisers?


----------



## wayneL (5 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Isn't the PMs Literary Award a load of cash given to Liberal Party sympathisers as judged by Liberal Party sympathisers?




Absolutely not! It is as impartial as the ABC :


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

The link below typifies how the Abbott haters and the ABC use twitter to expand and exaggerate their lies and propaganda.....No matter how small a piece of news, they will blow it up as some  major Abbott catastrophic.....Beware!!!!!!!!!!!!...the Fabians are at work 24/7. 

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|heading|homepage|homepage&itmt=1441418736250

*Fairfax didn’t in fact have the decency to apologise in its correction:

        CORRECTION: This column incorrectly asserts that the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, was involved in the decision to launch a planned Border Force operation in Melbourne. Fairfax Media accepts unreservedly that Mr Abbott was not involved in this decision, and also accepts that Mr Abbott had no foreknowledge of the Border Force plan to stop and speak to people about their visa status. *

John Lyons:

*[T]he Australian Border Force ... announced in a press release ...  “ABF officers will be positioned at various locations around the CBD speaking with any individual we cross paths with."…*

    During the next five hours, something occurred that typifies the new media world: while central Melbourne was relatively quiet, Twitter went into a frenzy: as many as 200,000 tweets were fired in all directions.

    Overwhelmingly, in the world of Twitter, the blame was sheeted home to Tony Abbott who, it seems, was completely unaware of any such operation as he toured Cape York…

    The ABF episode was an example of a story where there was more action at computer terminals than there was on the ground at Flinders Street — 200 to 300 protesters commanded widespread coverage.

    It illustrated how Twitter is having an impact on traditional news outlets: the ABC led its Friday evening bulletin with the story and The Age led its Saturday paper with it, something it might not have done before Twitter.

*    For The Age website, controversial Sydney barrister Charles Waterstreet wrote ... Operation Fortitude ... was to be “the perfect storm for perfect storm troopers” and would include a collection of “hitmen,” “bouncers”, “enforcers”, and “heavies” in “an almighty once-in-a-lifetime final crackdown on anti-social behaviour to outstanding warrants”.

    In case readers were not *already scared, Waterstreet wrote: “This all-streets sweep is the stuff Mussolini could only dream of.”

    On top of this, Saturday’s Age carried articles headlined “Border Force plan surely a crafty feint” and “A bad case of uniformed insanity”*.

    But given that only an estimated 12 per cent to 17 per cent of Australians use Twitter, it’s possible that many Victorians would have been stunned when they saw the paper on Saturday morning with a headline that warned: “Abbott’s border force coming to a street near you"…

    The incident put the spotlight on what can happen when social media such as Twitter runs alongside traditional media.

    Even though the ABF took to Twitter to insist that the concerns of the demonstrators were unfounded — “The ABF does not and will not stop people at random in the streets” — the Twitter genie was out of the bottle…

    But the problem that was evident this week — and is clearly here to stay — is that Twitter has no filters. Effectively, thousands of people acted as journalists, reporting and “re-tweeting” information that often was wrong.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> The link below typifies how the Abbott haters and the ABC use twitter to expand and exaggerate their lies and propaganda.....No matter how small a piece of news, they will blow it up as some  major Abbott catastrophic.....Beware!!!!!!!!!!!!...the Fabians are at work 24/7.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...|heading|homepage|homepage&itmt=1441418736250




Of course, it's a national crime to be Abbott haters, but not Rudd, Gillard or Shorten haters ?


----------



## noco (5 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Of course, it's a national crime to be Abbott haters, but not Rudd, Gillard or Shorten haters ?




The latter three deserve what they got and will get down the track

We have Abbott haters due to the good work of the Fabians.......They never let up in their harmful discredit and the naive believe the crap that they put out...As Richo says. "what ever it takes" to gain votes to convert us to Democratic socialism (Communism)


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> The latter three deserve what they got and will get down the track




And so will the former, who has made so many stuff ups, backflips and lies so as to make himself one of the most disliked and incompetent Prime Ministers this country has seen, as I believe will be demonstrated at the next election.


----------



## nioka (5 September 2015)

noco said:


> The latter three deserve what they got and will get down the track
> 
> We have Abbott haters due to the good work of the Fabians.......They never let up in their harmful discredit and the naive believe the crap that they put out...As Richo says. "what ever it takes" to gain votes to convert us to Democratic socialism (Communism)




"We have Abbott haters due to the good work of the Fabians......."

Hater is a harsh word. I don't "hate" Abbott but I dislike him intensely. Nothing to do with The Fabians. Nothing to do with Richo. Abbott deserves all the criticism he gets and will get down the track. I see him as a sleezy pollie that will do "whatever it takes" to stay in government.

Why?.... Well it starts with the way he hounded Pauline Hanson to the point of having her Australia's first and only political prisoner. He saw her as a threat and hounded her continuously. He was particularly nasty in opposition and was the most negative opposition politician that I have ever seen. I can't even stand his swagger as he parades before the camera. In my eyes he is morally deficient. He is not the sort of person that you can disagree with but still admire. That is what is needed in a national leader. He doesn't rate even 5 on a scale of 10. The polls too seem to agree with me.


----------



## bellenuit (5 September 2015)

nioka said:


> "We have Abbott haters due to the good work of the Fabians......."
> 
> Hater is a harsh word. I don't "hate" Abbott but I dislike him intensely. Nothing to do with The Fabians. Nothing to do with Richo. Abbott deserves all the criticism he gets and will get down the track. I see him as a sleezy pollie that will do "whatever it takes" to stay in government.
> 
> Why?.... Well it starts with the way he hounded Pauline Hanson to the point of having her Australia's first and only political prisoner. He saw her as a threat and hounded her continuously. He was particularly nasty in opposition and was the most negative opposition politician that I have ever seen. I can't even stand his swagger as he parades before the camera. In my eyes he is morally deficient. He is not the sort of person that you can disagree with but still admire. That is what is needed in a national leader. He doesn't rate even 5 on a scale of 10. The polls too seem to agree with me.




Pretty much as I see him even though I would see myself as right of centre.


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2015)

I agree with both Nokia and Noco. Abbott has really only been true to form. Never liked him but was prepared to give him a chance to be a man for the times. He screwed up  badly and continues to screw up.

The Fabian/left agenda, propaganda and hate politics is worse however

...and our country is going straight down the schit chute as a result.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> The Fabian/left agenda, propaganda and hate politics is worse however




It just doesn't compare with the hate propaganda of the Right

"ditch the witch"

"Bob Brown's bitch"

"died of shame"

"put her in a chaff bag and throw her overboard"

etc, etc


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It just doesn't compare with the hate propaganda of the Right
> 
> "ditch the witch"
> 
> ...




No there is no comparison. The right is mercurial, transparent, emotional, obvious, more like an inappropriate outburst.

The left iis calculated, sly, duplicitous,treasonous, poisonous.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> No there is no comparison. The right is mercurial, transparent, emotional, obvious, more like an inappropriate outburst.
> 
> The left iis calculated, sly, duplicitous,treasonous, poisonous.




Ha ha, laugh of the day


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Ha ha, laugh of the day




Happy to be of service lol. Happy Fathers Day


----------



## explod (6 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> No there is no comparison. The right is mercurial, transparent, emotional, obvious, more like an inappropriate outburst.
> 
> The left iis calculated, sly, duplicitous,treasonous, poisonous.




Not sure if you are jocking or not. 

The left are usually downtrodden,  less educated and have to work hard. 

The right born with the silver spoon,  take the cake and have few feelings for thier fellows. 

In my humble opinion.


----------



## wayneL (7 September 2015)

explod said:


> Not sure if you are jocking or not.
> 
> The left are usually downtrodden,  less educated and have to work hard.
> 
> ...




Only half joking.

The downtrodden are only the deluded plebeians that believe the left is looking out for them. The real left are the evil genii of academia, clergy and illuminati; practitioners of the dark arts of doublespeak and spin.

The genii of the right are running companies.

By the way, I wasn't born with a silver spoon, don't take the cake and am empathetic to a fault, furthermore, I have one of the physically hardest jobs ever invented, work in dust, mud and horse ****.

While I'm not particularly a fan of the Liberals, Hell would freeze over before I ever voted Labor or Green.

The near right, the libertarian right are the only true equal opportunists.


----------



## Logique (7 September 2015)

Howards Battlers and Tony's Tradies are blurring the convenient demarcations.

Big unions, climate catastrophists, academia and media journos seem to comprise the Left these days. 

With the China Free Trade agreement, non-union jobs don't count to Shorten Labor.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2015)

The sooking by the Liberals must have paid off, because this morning on ABC the PM and his adoring fan base got a free pass to brandish their achievements, intentions and how once again anything bad a pass to the Labor machine. 

Apparently it took a small business conflab in Canberra to reveal how damned well we are doing and how the unions (i.e. non cheap labour)  are making us not do so well ....can't quite figure how one compliments the other.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> The sooking by the Liberals must have paid off, because this morning on ABC the PM and his adoring fan base got a free pass to brandish their achievements, intentions and how once again anything bad a pass to the Labor machine.
> 
> Apparently it took a small business conflab in Canberra to reveal how damned well we are doing and how the unions (i.e. non cheap labour)  are making us not do so well ....can't quite figure how one compliments the other.




I saw Abbott trumpeting his "achievements", the business asset write off, carbon tax & mining tax out etc, all of which has led to an increase in unemployment.

Gee thanks Tony.


----------



## noco (7 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I saw Abbott trumpeting his "achievements", the business asset write off, carbon tax & mining tax out etc, all of which has led to an increase in unemployment.
> 
> Gee thanks Tony.




Well, why don't you tell that gutless wonder of a  Leader yours who  bows to the CFMEU to get out of the way and let the CHAFTA go through so more jobs can be created.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2015)

noco said:


> Well, why don't you tell that gutless wonder of a  Leader yours who  bows to the CFMEU to get out of the way and let the CHAFTA go through so more jobs can be created.




More jobs for Chinese


----------



## noco (7 September 2015)

The Fabian indoctrinated ABC are stooping to new lows as Shari Markson points out.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...515347905?sv=fddd072bddb84bb223641807339673eb

*ABC boss ‘puzzled’ by Adler’s demands

The ABC’s head of television Richard Finlayson says he was “dismayed” by a list of demands publisher Louise Adler sent him during negotiations for the broadcast of the Prime Minister’s Literary awards.

Ms Adler, Australian Pub*lishers Association president, revealed in The Weekend Australian the ABC had refused to broadcast live and unedited a literary speech by Tony Abbott.

This led to an irreconcilable breakdown in negotiations with the ABC about being the broadcaster for the PM’s Literary Awards, and the partnership went to Sky and SBS.

But Mr Finlayson denies there was any political motivation behind the decision not to broadcast Mr Abbott’s speech.

“To our surprise, Ms Adler *presented us with a remarkably comprehensive list of binding demands which would make the broadcast unworkable for the ABC and compromised its *editorial standards,” he said.

“These included an insistence that Jennifer Byrne’s name not be used in the title, despite it being a Book Club special. The speeches of both the Prime Minister (10 minutes) and the Minister for the Arts (four minutes) were to be included “unedited and uncut”, swallowing up 25 per cent of a packed awards and post-awards interview schedule”.

Mr Finlayson said Ms Adler “insisted” the ABC travel around the country and shoot and edit interviews with all 30 nominees, which he said was impossible within the time frame and budget.

He said he was “puzzled” at only being approached the month before the event, held in December last year, but was excited at the opportunity of bringing the Prime Minister’s Literary Awards to a large audience.

“To suggest that the ABC sought preferential treatment for the authors over Mr Abbott or that any editing of the Prime Minister’s speech was being done for political reasons is not only wrong; it is offensive,” he said.

“This is the second time Ms Adler and The Australian have sought to question the ABC’s motives in relation to the Awards.”

He said he presented Ms Adler and the Arts Minister’s office with a “more creative proposal” of a one-hour special of the ABC’s popular Book Club, hosted by Ms Byrne, rather than a straight broadcast of the awards.

“Our pitch was that this option would use an existing prime-time brand, much loved by ABC audiences, to showcase the Awards and significantly increase their profile,” he said.

“The program would include coverage of all speeches, including that of the Prime Minister and the Minister for the Arts.”

The ABC expected a national, consolidated audience of half a million viewers. You can read Mr Finlayson’s full response to the revelation that the ABC refused to broadcast live and unedited a literary speech by Mr Abbott online.*


----------



## noco (7 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> More jobs for Chinese




Rumpy, you certainly have been brainwashed by barnacle Bill and the CFMEU.

All the state Labor premiers, Bob Hawke, Bob Carr, Simon Crean and Martin Ferguson can't all be wrong as they know all your fears have been allayed. .

It has been explained to the nay Sayers that checks and balances are well in place to prevent what you say "MIGHT" happen.

It looks like you and Bill are the odd men out.


----------



## IFocus (7 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> More jobs for Chinese




LOL the strength of Australian society is its middle class and complete contempt for those moneyed pretenders who used political connections to amass thier wealth. 

This position came about due to many forces one being the strength of organized labor unions and their reps to increase the standards of working conditions and pay for blue collar workers (middle class Australians).

I have complete contempt for those that fail to acknowledge their own good fortune of a fortunate life in this Lucky County that fail to understand this and snipe away at the margins of pettiness.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2015)

IFocus said:


> LOL the strength of Australian society is its middle class and complete contempt for those moneyed pretenders who used political connections to amass thier wealth.
> 
> This position came about due to many forces one being the strength of organized labor unions and their reps to increase the standards of working conditions and pay for blue collar workers (middle class Australians).
> 
> I have complete contempt for those that fail to acknowledge their own good fortune of a fortunate life in this Lucky County that fail to understand this and snipe away at the margins of pettiness.




what's the difference with the Liberal party, the employer groups, etc banding together and formulating war strategies that benefit their members and the unions doing the same? Does the union movement get monies from the govt to help with expenses like these  "associations" do? Both are unions of like minded.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2015)

IFocus said:


> LOL the strength of Australian society is its middle class and complete contempt for those moneyed pretenders who used political connections to amass thier wealth.
> 
> This position came about due to many forces one being the strength of organized labor unions and their reps to increase the standards of working conditions and pay for blue collar workers (middle class Australians).
> 
> I have complete contempt for those that fail to acknowledge their own good fortune of a fortunate life in this Lucky County that fail to understand this and snipe away at the margins of pettiness.




Not sure who you are having a go at here, but imo the most successful economies are those where the majority are highly paid, but give value for their salaries. Both measurements are subjective of course, but if the population has no money they certainly can't spend it on the goods and services that business provides.

People like noco don't give a stuff about workers, but they also fail to acknowledge that it's also his business mates losing their investments as their businesses wind up and are replaced by foreign SOE's.

Seems a bit off topic for a "ABC is political" thread though.


----------



## wayneL (8 September 2015)

IFocus said:


> LOL the strength of Australian society is its middle class and complete contempt for those moneyed pretenders who used political connections to amass thier wealth.




LMAO I don't think those moneyed "pretenders" give a flying fig about your contempt. Fact is IF, it is the union movement in its current form that that facilitated many of them, both within and without the movement.


----------



## noco (9 September 2015)

I decided to watch QandA on Monday evening on one of those rare occasions.

I don't know whether anyone else on this forum noticed how a man whom I expect was anti Labor, directed a question to Chris Bowen something like "Given the the way the Labor Party left  our economy and how it is not helping to fix it, what will you do with the economic burden if you get back into power".

That scum bag Jones did a 'quick step' on the question and said I think we will start with Mike Baird on this one, then he jumped to 2 or 3 others and never did get back to Bowen.....I was surprised the questionnaire did not bring Jones back to whom the question was directed.....

Jones certainly protected his fABIAN  mate Bowen and yes I do have proof Bowen IS a member of the Fabian society

I would be more than happy if someone could relay a recording of that incident.


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2015)

noco said:


> I decided to watch QandA on Monday evening on one of those rare occasions.
> 
> I don't know whether anyone else on this forum noticed how a man whom I expect was anti Labor, directed a question to Chris Bowen something like "Given the the way the Labor Party left  our economy and how it is not helping to fix it, what will you do with the economic burden if you get back into power".
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/past-programs-by-date.htm


http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/vodcast.htm


----------



## noco (9 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/past-programs-by-date.htm
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/vodcast.htm




That particular question was asked on the 33 minute and went on to 40 minutes.

Jones started with Mike Baird and that lady Helen from the UK , then a member of the audience and then finally back to Bowen...By that time everybody most likely forget what the question was all about....Bowen waffled on and on which did not answer that guys question......Mind manipulation by Jones to save Bowen....I mean why didn't Jones go straight to Bowen as the question was directed to him (Bowen) in the first place?


----------



## SirRumpole (9 September 2015)

noco said:


> That particular question was asked on the 33 minute and went on to 40 minutes.
> 
> Jones started with Mike Baird and that lady Helen from the UK , then a member of the audience and then finally back to Bowen...By that time everybody most likely forget what the question was all about....Bowen waffled on and on which did not answer that guys question......Mind manipulation by Jones to save Bowen....I mean why didn't Jones go straight to Bowen as the question was directed to him (Bowen) in the first place?




Probably Jones started with someone else because he knew Bowen would waffle and he wanted others to have a say first.


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2015)

noco said:


> ...I mean why didn't Jones go straight to Bowen as the question was directed to him (Bowen) in the first place?





You aren't a seasoned watcher are you? There's no conspiracy in that, Tony does the same thing to Liberal cronies.

Thanks for acknowledging my helping you.


----------



## noco (9 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> You aren't a seasoned watcher are you? There's no conspiracy in that, Tony does the same thing to Liberal cronies.
> 
> Thanks for acknowledging my helping you.




Yes..Tisme thank you for that assistance.

But I still say Jones is very transparent ....I thought Bling Freddie would be able to see through Jones.


----------



## Tisme (10 September 2015)

I see the Chasers starts tonight, but this time it has been moved from the News Division so it can be more biased


----------



## dutchie (10 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> ...... so it can be more biased




LOL , I like the way your thinking.


----------



## noco (14 September 2015)

The ABC chief Mark Scott will  resign mid 2016...What a pity it was not now......Good riddance to a bad egg. ....Lets hope the board appoint a middle of the road CEO and not another biased leftie....There needs to be some ethnic cleansing in the ABC.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...ster-in-mid-2016/story-fnkjjewe-1227526629634


----------



## noco (14 September 2015)

Chris Kenny sums up the ABC bias and its love for that hypocrite Tony Windsor.

Windsor talks up big about Climate change but sells his farm to the coal mining industry which has been accused of supplying too much C02 into the atmosphere.

Windsor did not have the guts to stand in his old electorate in 2013.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opin...-1227525419146

*There’s been a lot of Windsor love at their ABC lately. No, not theQueen ”” they’ve been polite but restrained about her record-breaking reign. The national broadcaster has been particularly amorous towards the former independent MP Tony Windsor.

Windsor seems to have something or other on his liver, to be sure. He strikes me as one of the angriest blokes in a pretty feral polity. Even on the ABC or on Twitter, where myriad Abbott-haters jockey for daily prominence, this bitter former pollie is in a league of his own.

He is the ex-conservative independent who installed Julia Gillard and Labor, then barracked for their carbon tax while selling his farm to coal interests and leasing it back. But no, the ABC hasn’t harangued him over that.

Windsor defended the indefensible mistakes and incompetence of the Gillard government and promised to put his record on the line by running in the 2013 election ”” then didn’t. But no, Aunty’s people haven’t pressured him over that either. He is grabbing extra publicity now by threatening to run again (don’t hold your breath) but the ABC hasn’t pinned him down on that either.*


----------



## dutchie (20 September 2015)

Fran Kelly asks National Party member how he voted in Liberal leadership ballot.

ABC political expert at work.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2015)

Get your nominations in folks..



> *Calling for new members to join the ABC Advisory Council*
> 
> http://about.abc.net.au/who-we-are/abc-advisory-council/
> 
> ...


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

dutchie said:


> Fran Kelly asks National Party member how he voted in Liberal leadership ballot.
> 
> ABC political expert at work.




You cannot help laughing......But you note the ABC will let it all go through to the keeper in their usual biased fashion.

If it had been Andrew Bolt who had mad that bungle, the ABC would have played it out on every channel for a week.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> You cannot help laughing......But you note the ABC will let it all go through to the keeper in their usual biased fashion.
> 
> If it had been Andrew Bolt who had mad that bungle, the ABC would have played it out on every channel for a week.




Andrew Bolt making faux pas is not news.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Andrew Bolt making faux pas is not news.




Yes, I know how much you love Andrew.... You are well known in the criticism of Andrew Bolt.


----------



## Boggo (20 September 2015)

A Harley-Davidson bike rider is riding by the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lions' cage.
Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her into the cage, under the eyes of her screaming parents.

The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and smacks the lion square on the nose, with one hell of a punch.
Shocked and whimpering with pain, the lion releases the girl, and jumps back - and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who immediately thank him endlessly.

A news reporter standing nearby has stood and watched the whole event. The reporter rushes up, and addressing the H-D rider, says ... "Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I've ever seen a man do, in my whole life!"

The bike rider replies, "Why, it was nothing, really. The lion was behind the bars.
I just saw this little kid in danger, and acted like anyone else would."

The reporter says, "Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, and tomorrow's news will have the story. So, what do you do for a living, and where were you riding to?'

The biker replied, "I'm an SAS soldier just returned from Afghanistan, and I was just heading off to a right-wing political party meeting!"

The journalist thanks him and leaves.

The following morning the biker turns the tv to the ABC news and sees:

"SAS SOLDIER ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH."


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

Boggo said:


> A Harley-Davidson bike rider is riding by the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lions' cage.
> Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her into the cage, under the eyes of her screaming parents.
> 
> The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and smacks the lion square on the nose, with one hell of a punch.
> ...




That was probably the ABC or Fairfax....they do tend to exaggerate and expand on some tit bit news just as they tried to frame Andrew Hastie with cutting off the hands of some Taliban.....Take control of the media and you control the naive who believe it.


----------



## noco (28 September 2015)

Even Bary Humphries is awake to how far left the ABC is in relation to politics.....Even the POMS can see it and anybody who takes them for fools are no mugs.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...546250274?sv=4f49f84855068e373d394536a349374d

*Australia’s greatest comedic export, Barry Humphries, says the ABC has become an extreme left-wing broadcaster and the former prime minister Tony Abbott was correct to criticise it.

“The ABC has become increasingly left wing. Blatantly so. Indeed so has another notable Australian newspaper,” Humphries said in an interview with The Australian.

“And I was surprised that they (the ABC) can be so openly of the extreme left.”

During his visits to Australia, about four times a year, his esteem for the public broadcaster has diminished, although he thoroughly enjoyed Sarah Ferguson’s The Killing Season — while *suspecting the ABC produced it to ingratiate itself with the government during a difficult time in their relationship.

Humphries said the criticisms of the ABC by the former prime minister were justified.

“They were getting very worried about they relationship with the prime minister so they made this program with Rudd and *Gillard to ingratiate themselves, The Killing Season, one of the best things the ABC has done,” he said.

When Humphries reads the newspapers each day, he said he becomes “steamed up” and often finds himself angrily writing a *letter to the editor.

But he rarely sends them in.

“Every day when I read the paper something occurs when I get steamed up or fired up, steamed up, whatever, irate and I write a letter and never send it,” he said. “I have a pile. I should publish the letters. There’ve been a few good letters of mine.”*


----------



## noco (29 September 2015)

Having reluctantly watched QandA last night, it came  a bit surprising to see Tony Jones allowing such criticism of his beloved leftie Bill Shorten.

It was well mentioned how the Labor Party are moving to the extreme left into socialism.

Has Tony Jones seen the light on the hill?



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...548184047?sv=a8e8004e5d54d69f02b21ff10ce2e4a5

*Institute of Public Affairs director John Roskam, who said he has known Mr Shorten since primary school, said the opposition leader was managing a party that was “increasingly going left” and his challenge was to rise above it “to improve the quality of politics and policy.”

“It is not the party of Hawke, Keating, not the party of reform. It is a party that seems to be in thrall to a union movement,” Mr Roskam said. “It is a party that seems to be turning its back on the world.”

Shadow health minister Catherine King said her party’s leader had an “enormous capacity” to build partnerships.

“You saw it in disability, you have seen it in his Australian Workers Union days where he really was quite a moderate in terms of being able to actually broker deals between employers and the union to get the best outcomes for workers,” Mr King said.

Discussions about Mr Shorten’s leadership aptness turned to the Trade Union Royal Commission through which it was revealed he had failed to declare nearly $60,000 worth of electoral expenses, Mr Marr said.

“That bit, which is truly damaging and truly outrageous of Shorten, has been swept aside,” he said.

“What we are looking at instead is an area of possible conflicts of interest between the deals done when he was the leader of the AWU, deals he was simultaneously doing to have employers pay the union for various things and settling the wage rates and conditions for the workers themselves.”

Mr Marr said he agreed “just a little bit” with a questioner who asserted Australians had begun to “lean heavily to the left” but said their disenchantment with Mr Abbott was due to his “ultra conservative” and combative leadership style.

*

Read further down of the comments on Bill Shorten.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2015)

noco said:


> Having reluctantly watched QandA last night, it came  a bit surprising to see Tony Jones allowing such criticism of his beloved leftie Bill Shorten.
> 
> It was well mentioned how the Labor Party are moving to the extreme left into socialism.




Ha ! Anyone to the Left of you is a socialist old chap.

As Union leaders come Shorten is one of the most moderate who wants to ensure that Australians have jobs after CHAFTA. That's his job.

Remember John Halfpenny and Norm Gallagher ? I wouldn't compare Shorten with either of those two fruitcakes.

BTW didn't your hero Barnaby bluster when we couldn't answer the question about how much Direct Action would cost to achieve 28% reduction in CO2 emmissions ?

Just shows what a crock Direct Action is.


----------



## dutchie (29 September 2015)

Catherine King the rudest politician.

King continually interrupted and over spoke Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce whenever he tried to answer a question on qanda.

Jones did not stop her.

That women has no class.


----------



## noco (29 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Ha ! Anyone to the Left of you is a socialist old chap.
> 
> As Union leaders come Shorten is one of the most moderate who wants to ensure that Australians have jobs after CHAFTA. That's his job.
> 
> ...




Yes Rumpy, it is all starting to unravel.....left...center left...extreme left and socialist left ....Take your pick......The Labor Party are slowly progressing from one to the other and sooner or later voters will be the judge.

The LUG party had no idea what their cost would be with their 50% renewable energy target until Treasury told them...The figure was outrages.

Do you have any figures or a link on the Direct Action plan which we are told has reduced emissions by something like 10 times that of Labor's carbon tax which Gillard said "there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead".....Just thought I would prod your memory and barnacle Bill wants to bring it back as his policy going into the next election, that is of course if he is still the Labor Partly leader by then.


----------



## Tisme (29 September 2015)

I noticed that media tart and leftist Barnaby Joyce was once again appearing on his favourite show last night. He must have got permission from his new Labor boss Malcolm.

It's about time the ABC provided a balanced panel with less Joyce and Turnbull and more from Alex Hawke, Debbie Robinson, Pauline, Saraya Beric, Cory , etc. 

It's only right that equal views be provided across the political landscape ... it's the keystone of our great socialist society.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> I noticed that media tart and leftist Barnaby Joyce was once again appearing on his favourite show last night. He must have got permission from his new Labor boss Malcolm.
> 
> It's about time the ABC provided a balanced panel with less Joyce and Turnbull and more from Alex Hawke, Debbie Robinson, Pauline, Saraya Beric, Cory , etc.
> 
> It's only right that equal views be provided across the political landscape ... it's the keystone of our great socialist society.




Yes, I would like to see Bernadi and Hanson try to answer some tough questions and argue their looney viewpoints in public.


----------



## Tisme (29 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I would like to see Bernadi and Hanson try to answer some tough questions and argue their looney viewpoints in public.




See Cory is really an old school Labor man who couldn't find a niche in that party and had to do a Brendan Nelson by taking the easy preselection path into politics. His pedigree is the pre sixties political bedrocks common to both major parties and the vast majority of citizens at the time: white australia, protectionism, nationalism, hard work, paternalism, Doris Day and BP Pick a Box.

And worse he's South Australian so theatrics and Salvation Jane runs in his blood.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2015)

Wow, Leigh Sales, interviewing Toni Collette, rather than slapping Tony Abbott all over the place.

Nice to see some civil reporting.lol


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> See Cory is really an old school Labor man who couldn't find a niche in that party and had to do a Brendan Nelson by taking the easy preselection path into politics. His pedigree is the pre sixties political bedrocks common to both major parties and the vast majority of citizens at the time: white australia, protectionism, nationalism, hard work, paternalism, Doris Day and BP Pick a Box.
> 
> And worse he's South Australian so theatrics and Salvation Jane runs in his blood.




The other common name, Patterson's Curse, may be more apt


----------



## Tisme (1 October 2015)

wayneL said:


> The other common name, Patterson's Curse, may be more apt




yeah it was a toss up, but given his crusading nature .......


----------



## drsmith (10 October 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull copped a bit of stick from some of the party faithful today at the NSW Liberal Party conference,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...abbott-an-enormous-debt-turnbull-says/6843816



> But not all of the new Prime Minister's comments were met with applause and support from the party faithful, particularly when he turned to what he believes makes the Liberal Party great.
> 
> He said the party was a broad church, with members from a wide variety of backgrounds.
> 
> ...




The above has been highlighted more in the commercial media. It wasn't the highlight of the ABC's article above but would have been had it been Tony Abbott at the podium ?

Also of interest in relation to the ABC is the following,



> The ABC will try to seize on Tony Abbott's demise as prime minister to push for fresh funding from the Turnbull government to pay for its news and current affairs services.
> 
> ABC managing director Mark Scott said on Friday that he would argue investing in the public broadcaster is a "sure bet" for the government given the "endless existential shocks" being experienced by commercial media outlets.
> 
> ...




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...abbott-abc-funding-boost-20151009-gk5jhp.html


----------



## Tink (11 October 2015)

Well it is not their ABC, the Labor/Greens mouthpiece, where they cheered him on - the Liberals will tell him what they really think of him.

As was said, 

_“When a Prime Minister doesn’t get a standing ovation from his own Party, but the bloke he rolled, Tony Abbott does… there’s a message.”_

Very telling..

After their 24 hour hate media on Tony Abbott, the ABC now want their handout for helping him out.

The same happened at the Grand Final, that Turnbull was booed.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 October 2015)

Tink said:


> Well it is not their ABC, the Labor/Greens mouthpiece, where they cheered him on - the Liberals will tell him what they really think of him.
> 
> As was said,
> 
> ...




Totally agree.

Bring back Abbott !

Make Shorten's day !


----------



## noco (11 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Totally agree.
> 
> Bring back Abbott !
> 
> Make Shorten's day !





ROFL......Shortens day is coming and it won't be by bring back Abbott..


----------



## Uncle Festivus (11 October 2015)

Tony Abbot was an international embarrassment, and was destined to be replaced by someone else eventually  after his failed election promises and numerous 'Captains Picks'. It's worth watching all the neo-con monarchists whine and winge about Turnbull, but he will be replaced by Bishop (not the farcical comic former speaker Bishop) down the track.

As for Bill 'Zinger' Shorten, he's on borrowed time too, before he gets replaced with some other union vetted bobble head. But the bottom of the Labour barrel is empty too. Is it just me but every time he opens his mouth I cringe at his insincerity and staged verbal theatrics.

It is indeed a sad time with the quality of the political class we have to choose from to 'lead' us - regardless of which party they belong to. They are all ensconced in a cozy system of self promotion and advancement at the expense of the rest of us - the recent expenses fiasco from all sides shows how out of touch they all are.

Toss the lot of them out and start again............


----------



## noco (11 October 2015)

Uncle Festivus said:


> Tony Abbot was an international embarrassment, and was destined to be replaced by someone else eventually  after his failed election promises and numerous 'Captains Picks'. It's worth watching all the neo-con monarchists whine and winge about Turnbull, but he will be replaced by Bishop (not the farcical comic former speaker Bishop) down the track.
> 
> As for Bill 'Zinger' Shorten, he's on borrowed time too, before he gets replaced with some other union vetted bobble head. But the bottom of the Labour barrel is empty too. Is it just me but every time he opens his mouth I cringe at his insincerity and staged verbal theatrics.
> 
> ...




Well said uncle.


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2015)

Howse the ABC's "political bias" going? Haven't seen many indignant posts claiming unfairness against Liberal Malcolm Turbull


----------



## basilio (15 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Howse the ABC's "political bias" going? Haven't seen many indignant posts claiming unfairness against Liberal Malcolm Turbull




That, Tisme,  is because Malcolm is clearly not a real Liberal !  He is actually a Labour stooge who has been carefully parachuted into power as a last desperate attempt to pull middle Australia back to voting Liberal.

When the next election is won in a Liberal landslide (including the Senate mind you!) Malcolm will have done his job and the bus will come to take him away. (just after it has run over him.)


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2015)

basilio said:


> That, Tisme,  is because Malcolm is clearly not a real Liberal !  He is actually a Labour stooge who has been carefully parachuted into power as a last desperate attempt to pull middle Australia back to voting Liberal.
> 
> When the next election is won in a Liberal landslide (including the Senate mind you!) Malcolm will have done his job and the bus will come to take him away. (just after it has run over him.)




 Fight fire with fire you reckon.

I must say he is very similar to Brendan Nelson who was also a wannabe Labor candidate (and admits it).

Not a fan of Malcolm, but we have had the breather we needed from the cliche PM he toppled.


----------



## noco (15 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Howse the ABC's "political bias" going? Haven't seen many indignant posts claiming unfairness against Liberal Malcolm Turbull





Shhhhh!!!....I think he is working for the Labor Party and they are  secretly paying Turnbull in the Cayman Islands with Bill's super fund.


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2015)

noco said:


> Shhhhh!!!....I think he is working for the Labor Party and they are  secretly paying Turnbull in the Cayman Islands with Bill's super fund.




I'd be impressed if they had a home share on the Caymans


----------



## Logique (20 October 2015)

Wow, Four Corners last night. I thought, did he really say that? Yes, he really said that.

If you travel the world on HSU expenses, if you take 9 months sick leave on a $430k/an job..what did they think was going to happen?

They seem a little naive (Jackson more so), and a little out of their depth, but in spite of everything, I do feel for these two, they really are the 'David' facing the 'Goliath' in this battle.  

I hope they receive and take, the best advice from this point on.  



> *The vulgar pinnacle of a bizarre Four Corners with Kathy Jackson and Michael Lawler*
> Kate Aubusson, SMH, 20 October 2015: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ckson-and-michael-lawler-20151020-gkd3b0.html
> 
> Just when you thought Four Corners' explosive investigation into the forbidden love between a union boss and a Fair Work Commission official couldn't get more bizarre, someone dropped the c-bomb.
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2015)

Logique said:


> Wow, Four Corners last night. I thought, did he really say that? Yes, he really said that.
> 
> If you travel the world on HSU expenses, if you take 9 months sick leave on a $430k/an job..what did they think was going to happen?
> 
> ...




Just wondering why this post is in "ABC is Political" ? Are you saying that 4C last night was another example of the ABC's "politicality" ?

Whatever, I thought those two Lawler and Jackson were a pair of wackos who deserve each other. What a rotten pair.

Lawler takes 9 months sick leave on OUR money to defend his wacko partner and then boasts about it on tv, not to mention sitting on cases that involved his partner, a clear conflict of interest. 

What a disgrace. He should be sacked from the Fair Work Commission immediately.


----------



## Tisme (20 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Just wondering why this post is in "ABC is Political" ? Are you saying that 4C last night was another example of the ABC's "politicality" ?
> 
> Whatever, I thought those two Lawler and Jackson were a pair of wackos who deserve each other. What a rotten pair.
> 
> ...




Same Fair Work that pursued Craig Thompson for years, while the whistleblower Jackson was busy spending money on herself?  

I wonder if a deal was made for the umpires to look the other way if Craig was ousted in a hung parliament and the LNP got the win?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> I wonder if a deal was made for the umpires to look the other way if Craig was ousted in a hung parliament and the LNP got the win?




We may never know, but as Lawler was appointed by Abbott suspicions may be raised about whose side Lawler was on.


----------



## Logique (20 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Just wondering why this post is in "ABC is Political" ? ...



Deserves it's own thread really, this was just the closest fit.  

The ABC reportage seemed even-handed enough. Although they might have partially bleeped out the c..struck bit.


----------



## noco (20 October 2015)

Logique said:


> Deserves it's own thread really, this was just the closest fit.
> 
> The ABC reportage seemed even-handed enough. Although they might have partially bleeped out the c..struck bit.




What is wrong with the thread covering the RC into union corruption?


----------



## Tisme (21 October 2015)

Reading the online responses by LNP tragics to the table broken affair, it is quite evident they have the insider facts on whodunnit, it wasn't Jamie Briggs, but the Penny Wong's debt legacy in concert with the ABC apparently. Good on them for clearing that up.


----------



## MrBurns (21 October 2015)

noco said:


> What is wrong with the thread covering the RC into union corruption?




The RC is a waste of money, just throw all the bastards in jail along with that lying sleaze bag Shorten who is in this up to his neck


----------



## noco (22 October 2015)

I watched QandA on Monday night and in particular how the Greenie and Labor raved on about 100 kids still in detention on Nauru Island....Never mind about the 2000 who were held in detention under Labor and the 1250 lives lost at sea....No no...we must not talk about that. 

I was disappointed in Ken Wyatt's response as he appeared ill-informed as to what has taken place with those kids.

From what I understand of the situation is the government tried to take the women and kids off Nauru while their fathers and husbands were being checked out for their identity and their country of origin.......The illegals who are not willing to co-operate are really $hitting in their own nests....But on the other hand they have been told they will not be settled in Australia and have been given the option to either return home or go to Cambodia....It is more than likely those still on Nauru are not genuine refugees and may well be from Iran or a country where their is no persecution...they are here for the economic reason of a generous welfare system. 

As for that Muslim on the show, he was having 2 bob each way...Grrrr.


----------



## Tisme (22 October 2015)

noco said:


> I watched QandA on Monday night .




Good to see you are broadening your information base away from the NewsCrap sphere


----------



## noco (22 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Good to see you are broadening your information base away from the NewsCrap sphere




Excuse me????????

It is a pity you did not start talking sensible stuff people can understand instead of all these juvenile  riddles  you waffle on about in your posts....Most of it makes no sense..


----------



## SirRumpole (22 October 2015)

noco said:


> Excuse me????????
> 
> It is a pity you did not start talking sensible stuff people can understand instead of all these juvenile  riddles  you waffle on about in your posts....Most of it makes no sense..




You need to be attuned to a Higher Force


----------



## Tisme (22 October 2015)

noco said:


> Excuse me????????
> 
> It is a pity you did not start talking sensible stuff people can understand instead of all these juvenile  riddles  you waffle on about in your posts....Most of it makes no sense..




Obviously QANDA hasn't begun it's antidote to the frontal lobe.  Give it time 'ol boy...now what do we do about that paralysed funny bone of yours tch tch :


----------



## Tisme (22 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> You need to be attuned to a Higher Force





God bless you my son


----------



## Tom32 (22 October 2015)

MrBurns said:


> The RC is a waste of money, just throw all the bastards in jail along with that lying sleaze bag Shorten who is in this up to his neck




To be fair to Shorten his maneuvering to dislodge the CFMEU from the east link project was a pro business move, at least in application, even if not in intent. Sure he made business pay his union: the AWU but they were only prepared to pay because it was a better deal than what dealing with the CFMEU would have been.

I don't think that is jail time worthy, it's just making a quid for his employer at the time which was the AWU.

I think the people who should really be dark at him are the workers who basically pay their dues to unions to get the best possible result and then you have one Union White Anting another.

Don't see how any of that is criminal?

I should add my experience attempting to negotiate with the vic AWU in the think of all that around 06-07 is that they would not budge on pay v the CFMEU but would only move on rdo flexibility and inclement weather around heat. Not massive concessions really anyway.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 October 2015)

> I think the people who should really be dark at him are the workers who basically pay their dues to unions to get the best possible result and then you have one Union White Anting another.
> 
> Don't see how any of that is criminal?




I don't see how unions white anting each other is criminal any more than businesses cutting their competitions throats by cutting costs or using shoddy materials or badmouthing the competitions products is criminal.

It's certainly not the best business model available but competition policy apparently says that this sort of thing is fine "in the interests of the consumer".

Businesses amalgamate and take over other businesses to improve their operations and profits so thinking that unions should not do the same is a bit naive.


----------



## sptrawler (1 November 2015)

This is typical misleading reporting.IMO

The Roe HWY extension 8 is required, no matter who is in Government, trucks coming to a T junction, then doglegging endlessly to get to a port is crazy.
Whether it is the existing port or a new port, the trucks still will need to arrive and depart them in an efficient manner.
Getting to the article, the last sentence sums up the ABC's, weird take on journalistic license.

Earlier this week, Mr Barnett was surrounded by protestors and heckled in Bibra Lake as the Government announced that Leighton Contractors would build stage one of the project.

They were surrounded by about 20 protesters.

Surrounded, I don't think so, talk it up ABC , 20 people, in a population of 1.4 million, what a hoot. 

The ABC is becoming very sad at relaying the truth accurately.IMO

Here's the whole article.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-01/colin-barnett-parks-stage-two-of-perth-freight-link/6903282


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2015)

sptrawler said:


> This is typical misleading reporting.IMO
> 
> The Roe HWY extension 8 is required, no matter who is in Government, trucks coming to a T junction, then doglegging endlessly to get to a port is crazy.
> Whether it is the existing port or a new port, the trucks still will need to arrive and depart them in an efficient manner.
> ...




One thing I admire about West Australians is their on the ground defence of things that don't sit right ...even if the govt ignores them. In QLD no one gives a fig and merely shrugs off the loss of dispensable things like Koala habitats, fisheries, farms, historical bldgs, the rivers, etc... the ultimate she'll be right attitude that centres around Rugby League and Jetskis.

I'm trying to figure out if those protestors were stooges for the Premier's propaganda or actually concerned citizens?

Does the ABC criticise the Premier regularly or keep his profile up as favours to his media advisors?


----------



## sptrawler (2 November 2015)

Tisme said:


> One thing I admire about West Australians is their on the ground defence of things that don't sit right ...even if the govt ignores them. In QLD no one gives a fig and merely shrugs off the loss of dispensable things like Koala habitats, fisheries, farms, historical bldgs, the rivers, etc... the ultimate she'll be right attitude that centres around Rugby League and Jetskis.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out if those protestors were stooges for the Premier's propaganda or actually concerned citizens?
> 
> Does the ABC criticise the Premier regularly or keep his profile up as favours to his media advisors?




Barnett runs a close second to Abbott, in the media support stakes.

It is just that Barnett ignores them and gets on with it.


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Barnett runs a close second to Abbott, in the media support stakes.
> 
> It is just that Barnett ignores them and gets on with it.




He plays the reluctant hero card well, I've heard?  Kinda "Awe gee if I really have to me Premier I'll keep doin' it 'til you get fed up with me, then I'll going surfin'"


----------



## noco (2 November 2015)

The ABC will get a new broom in 2016......Gotta get rid of Scott....and good riddense to a bad smell.


----------



## sptrawler (2 November 2015)

Tisme said:


> He plays the reluctant hero card well, I've heard?  Kinda "Awe gee if I really have to me Premier I'll keep doin' it 'til you get fed up with me, then I'll going surfin'"




A past president of the W.A Australian Services Union, who was a personal friend, told me Barnett was the only one in W.A politics with a brain.

Everyone thinks he is arrogant, but I think he is just pi$$ed off talking to muppets like McGowan every day.

Anyone would get sick of defending the obvious everyday, like this freight link storm in a tea cup, eventually Perth needs a ring road.
This Roe Hwy extension is part of it, whether it is completed now or in 10 years time, it will be completed.
Yet Labor think by opposing it they look clever, they look stupid.IMO


----------



## Tisme (3 November 2015)

sptrawler said:


> A past president of the W.A Australian Services Union, who was a personal friend, told me Barnett was the only one in W.A politics with a brain.
> 
> Everyone thinks he is arrogant, but I think he is just pi$$ed off talking to muppets like McGowan every day.
> 
> ...




Perth doesn't seem to have changed much over the years...the urban sprawl is obviously noticeable, but there's a sameness to metroscape.


----------



## sptrawler (3 November 2015)

Tisme said:


> Perth doesn't seem to have changed much over the years...the urban sprawl is obviously noticeable, but there's a sameness to metroscape.




That's true and why a seamless road will be required, to bypass it. 
If you are arriving from the south, North or east there will be a need for a bypass road.
The big issue is, if you need to get to either the current Freo harbour, or the proposed Kwinana harbour. 
Also you have major light industrial areas to the North and East, these require truck routes to the port facilities.
Currently, if you want to travel from the North of Perth to the south, or visa versa, it really means travelling through the centre of the city.
Which is already a problem, it will be horrific in 5 years time.
Like I said, it doesn't matter who is in office, eventually it will have to be completed, demographic pressure will make it happen.
Labor just are looking stupid, trying to make political mileage out of it.IMO


----------



## Tisme (4 November 2015)

sptrawler said:


> That's true and why a seamless road will be required, to bypass it.
> If you are arriving from the south, North or east there will be a need for a bypass road.
> The big issue is, if you need to get to either the current Freo harbour, or the proposed Kwinana harbour.
> Also you have major light industrial areas to the North and East, these require truck routes to the port facilities.
> ...




The govt banned through trucks in Brisbane ages ago, but there is  major sized twin "Gateway" bridges and the Logan Motorway the trucks are forced to use to ring the city. 

Perth is relatively easy compared to Brisbane for road infrastructure, it's sandy, it's flat and not built up. Brisbane doesn't have limestone for cement, doesn't have much sand, has rugged terrain which is mostly shale, has a ramshackle planning history, large tracts of heavy vegetation, but it has way more major infrastructure than Perth and still boasts massive carparks that extend from the city to loganholme and beyond at days end.

Your Roe Hwy should be a freeway and you are right coming through the city from Mitchell Fwy to Kwinana does work, but it's not capable of handling real truck flows that will come eventually.


----------



## Logique (7 November 2015)

I don't think we should assume that Kerry O'Brien won't be back to the cosy sinecure of topping and tailing Four Corners. 

Caroline Jones last hosted Four Corners in 1981, but is still introducing Australian Story in 2015.

The taxpayers are really getting their money's worth from the ABC.


----------



## dutchie (10 November 2015)

Now this is how the ABC should be.

An excellent episode of Q&A on euthanasia. Good panel. Good questions. Polite and minimal interruptions, even from Tony Jones.

No bias!!

Andrew Denton was brilliant.

Dr Rodney Syme - brave and compassionate.


----------



## Logique (10 November 2015)

Very impressed with Denton last night.

He might be heading for "figurehead" territory, along with Dr Phillip Nitszchke.


----------



## Tink (10 November 2015)

There is an article about it this morning -
http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...discussing-death/story-fn948wjf-1227602423140

- - - - - - -
_
Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia_
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3588&page=25


----------



## dutchie (10 November 2015)

In Australia you can have a long drawn out euthanasia experience via palliative care but your not allowed to have a short euthanasia experience even if you want one. Crazy.


----------



## MrBurns (10 November 2015)

Logique said:


> Very impressed with Denton last night.
> 
> He might be heading for "figurehead" territory, along with Dr Phillip Nitszchke.




Agreed Denton was very impressive indeed.
Jones has a hard job and does it well IMO


----------



## noco (24 November 2015)

More political bias by the ABC....they just cannot help themselves with this Global Warming crap.

They are still persisting with that Flannery dud and other cohorts who are not climate scientists.

Why didn't the ABC invite some skeptics onto the program just to have another opinion and a good debate after all the Alarmist are now in the minority.

The Paris summit will be another dud event with no international agreement being reached.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ents/the_abc_a_soapbox_for_warming_alarmists/


----------



## SirRumpole (24 November 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Jones has a hard job and does it well IMO




I agree.  I don't think most people realise how hard a job it is to keep the discussion going while giving everyone a fair say but not letting them ramble on, and also deciding when to invite more audience participation.

Having seen Tony Jones on Lateline with his incisive interviews on any number of subjects, I think he's one of the best TV journos around.


----------



## Tisme (24 November 2015)

Is anyone else getting peeved at the obvious bias in favour of the LNP? 


I see Kerry O'Brien has pulled the plug on his regular activities at the ABC ....... another guy vilified for being a professional journalist who doesn't take fools easily.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 November 2015)

Tisme said:


> Is anyone else getting peeved at the obvious bias in favour of the LNP?
> 
> 
> I see Kerry O'Brien has pulled the plug on his regular activities at the ABC ....... another guy vilified for being a professional journalist who doesn't take fools easily.




The ABC has swung to the LNP somewhat, probably due to the fact that Turnbull is more kindly disposed to it than Abbott was.


----------



## noco (7 December 2015)

The ABC has not changed particularly in regards to Climate Change and Border protection.

They are desperately trying to white wash the government over kids in detention again.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ink-out-of-step-with-reality/story-fn8qlm5e-1

*RN Breakfast host Fran Kelly famously told us she was “firmly of the view that a price on carbon is the way forward” and that “we have to get into this”. Rather than admonish her, we should applaud her honesty. (She later said she regretted sharing her political views so openly.) The ABC’s charter obligations demand its presenters and journalists are objective; so they have to pretend to be political eunuchs. It doesn’t work. We knew from listening to Kelly day in and day out that she is fully on board with the ABC groupthink of climate alarmism and the Greens/Labor prescription that says extra costs in Australia can somehow contribute to a global solution.

Insiders host Barrie Cassidy wrote in The Drum on Friday that the change in prime minister had not altered our treatment of asylum-seekers — “the government is still capable of being cruel to the children of asylum-seekers”. He said this even though asylum-seekers are no longer arriving, and are being ushered only in one direction by this government, out of detention rather than into it. Still, we are not surprised either, that Cassidy subscribes to the ABC groupthink against strong border protection.

“On that issue,” he wrote, “we remain an international embarrassment.” One person’s exemplar — secure borders, no deaths at sea, removing people from detention, and a record refugee intake — can be another’s embarrassment.

ABC groupthink is prevalent across other issues — universal embrace of indigenous recognition, suspicion about national security laws, support for gay marriage and greater concern about Islamophobia than Islamism — but let’s designate global warming and border security as the standout issues. After all, they have been pivotal domestic political issues for the past decade or more, playing crucial roles in election and leadership results. And the ABC view on them has been wrong.

Soft border protection has proven disastrous while stronger measures have worked. While the climate has failed to match frightening models, carbon pricing has been and gone, direct action has done what was intended, and the ABC still hasn’t bothered to inform us about the globally inconsequential nature of Australia’s policy decisions.

Besides, for an organisation that is supposed to reflect the plurality of community views, it is worth noting that the ABC’s preference for soft borders and a price on carbon is out of alignment with the majority of Australians as expressed in opinion polls and election results.

Media Watch Watch would like to offer a public service for those determined to demonstrate the ABC is not ruled by groupthink. This column will list those journalists, hosts and producers from the broadcaster who are willing to publicly endorse Operation Sovereign Borders and offshore processing.

The same offer applies to those prepared to endorse Direct Action and the current emissions reduction and renewable energy targets. These positions are the prevailing policies at the moment, they are working, and they won endorsement from mainstream voters, so it wouldn’t be too much to expect strong support among Aunty’s crew. Drop MWW a line — it will be a pleasure to trumpet your mainstream views.

Another observation occurred after reading Cassidy in The Drum on the Mal Brough affair. “Why has Malcolm Turnbull not heard the deafening alarm bells around the Special Minister of State, Mal Brough?” he asked. “It’s troubling enough that he failed to see the risks in bringing Brough into the ministry even though the James Ashby/Peter Slipper affair was still to be resolved. But not understanding that the situation for Brough had this week dangerously escalated brings his judgment further into doubt.” Fair enough; Cassidy saw a politician digging in during a scandal, so sounded alarm bells for his boss.

But check out Cassidy on the same site more than three years ago when former Labor MP Craig Thomson was digging in against corruption allegations. “The politicians and the media first heard the alarm bells ringing early one morning in October 1997, when senator Nick Sherry was found on the floor of his Canberra flat in a pool of blood, having tried to take his own life.” Cassidy was ringing alarm bells not for the prime minister or government but for the pressure being placed on the Thomson. “Now — 2012 — the alarm bells are ringing again,” he wrote. “Liberal MP Mal Washer, a doctor, told the ABC’s 7.30 this week that MPs had a duty of care to make sure that former Labor MP Craig Thomson ‘is not at risk of self-harm’.”

Cassidy’s concern, no doubt, was heartfelt — most journalists would have discussed similar concerns over issues and people they have covered. Friends and colleagues need to be aware of personal vulnerabilities when people are under intense pressure. It goes without saying we all want people to exhibit resilience and keep their trials in perspective. But political journalists can’t be expected to make judgments about personal wellbeing; perhaps it is better for them to stick to the political issues and hold everyone accountable to the same standards.
*


----------



## So_Cynical (7 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC has swung to the LNP somewhat, probably due to the fact that Turnbull is more kindly disposed to it than Abbott was.




The fact that interviewers can engage Malcolm in conversation is probably a factor, Tony's rhetoric and 3 word slogans didn't make for good viewing.


----------



## Logique (7 December 2015)

Now they've got Malcolm's 100-word slogans 

For balance, Aunty has hired Ms Harmer and Ms Bowditch.  

Watch out Lefties, these two will chase you down all your foxholes!


----------



## Knobby22 (8 December 2015)

I like the innovation policy. Should have been done 20 years ago.


----------



## So_Cynical (17 December 2015)

It's official, the ABC is not bias. 



			
				ABC review said:
			
		

> A review of ABC panel program Q&A has found former prime minister Tony Abbott’s criticism that the program is a “lefty lynch mob” is not substantiated, but warned that host Tony Jones should be careful not to “overreach” in his questioning.
> 
> The editorial review, commissioned by the ABC, was conducted by television journalist Ray Martin and former SBS managing director Shaun Brown.




http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/12/17/qa-lefty-lynch-mob-review/


----------



## Tisme (18 December 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> It's official, the ABC is not bias.
> 
> 
> 
> http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/12/17/qa-lefty-lynch-mob-review/




Unnecessary expenditure in the first place. It must be nice for them these days not having to respond to juvenile demands from a prime minister.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Unnecessary expenditure in the first place. It must be nice for them these days not having to respond to juvenile demands from a prime minister.




Yes, good riddance to Captain Paranoia.


----------



## wayneL (18 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Unnecessary expenditure in the first place. It must be nice for them these days not having to respond to juvenile demands from a prime minister.




Nice work if you can get it. Get paid to say "Nothing to see here folks, move along"

Ray and Shaun must have been watching po..... Well, they couldn't have been watching Q&A.


----------



## drsmith (18 December 2015)

I remember Ray's public commentary from July.


----------



## Tisme (19 December 2015)

drsmith said:


> I remember Ray's public commentary from July.





At the risk of spawning a "year that was" vine, I too remember Ray's extraordinary foresight, his appointment and continued support for his role by the then Prime Minister. I also remember some bloke who thought he was important as Australian of the Year throwing virtual spears at fans of another team ....  polarised nation along political and social lines it seems.


----------



## Tink (10 February 2016)

*“Play School is not the place for the ABC to run agendas. *

_Parents should be able to trust their toddlers to the ABC’s Play School program without worrying if they are being exposed to controversial political and social agendas, 

“Parents should not be forced to explain to little children how it is that two men come to have a baby

Play School yesterday announced it would feature two men raising a child in its popular Through the Windows segment.

“It is disappointing that the ABC is seeking to impose rainbow politics on toddlers when millions of their parents do not agree with redefining marriage in law.

“Millions of Australians also do not agree that two men should be allowed to deliberately deprive a child of its mother. This does not mean two men can not love a child, of course they can. The issue is whether or not it is right for the child to be deprived of its mother and whether this should be taught as ethical to toddlers.

“The ABC should also not assume that producing children through harvested eggs and a rented or donated woman’s womb to meet the desires of two men is a public good.

“Unsupervised watching of Play School was always considered safe by generations of parents. Now parents can’t be sure if their children are going to be exposed to contested social and political agendas.

The Australian people will be deciding whether or not marriage (and with it parenting) is redefined in a national plebiscite after the federal election, should the Coalition win.

“Many parents will be disappointed with this, particularly as this is a taxpayer-funded program that should refrain from pushing confusing adult messaging to our children.

“Parent’s shouldn’t be forced to have adult conversations about sexuality and bioethics with their kids at such a young age and it certainly should not be the government broadcaster raising the subject with them.”

The nature of the ABC as a taxpayer-funded broadcaster meant that it should maintain its objectivity on political issues, particularly when matters crucial to the definition of marriage and family are subject to a national vote.

“ABC Kids in particular should be particularly sensitive to what it shows to young impressionable minds and refrain from introducing contested social concepts into their children’s programing
_

Play School segment to feature gay fathers
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/play-school-segment-to-feature-gay-fathers-20160204-gmlko0.html


----------



## Tink (10 February 2016)

ABC boss Mark Scott raises prospect of ABC-SBS merger

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...s/news-story/5d95cf38d6b9fdb760b1058a0524ece7

Time to privatise it.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 February 2016)

I don't agree with privatising the ABC but neither do I agree with it pushing a social agenda of gay parenting onto children as though it is acceptable in society.

It's not acceptable to a lot of people and Play School should keep out of that area.


----------



## Tisme (10 February 2016)

Tink said:


> *“Play School is not the place for the ABC to run agendas. *
> 
> _Parents should be able to trust their toddlers to the ABC’s Play School program without worrying if they are being exposed to controversial political and social agendas,
> 
> ...






One thing I will say about that ACL piece is that when my kids were toddlers the various mothers in my circle would watch it religiously to see John's double entendres... the kids must have picked up on John making mummy happy. But he was clever enough not to hijack the show to engineer a generation to accept unnatural pairing, religions, etc


----------



## noco (10 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't agree with privatising the ABC but neither do I agree with it pushing a social agenda of gay parenting onto children as though it is acceptable in society.
> 
> It's not acceptable to a lot of people and Play School should keep out of that area.




If the ABC is privatized it may root out the Fabians who run the show....But then again if it was privatized, the Fabians might take it over which in turn would be funded by the LUG party......The propaganda machine would be in full swing to promote socialism.....

No not a good idea to privatize....leave it under the limited control of the government.


----------



## dutchie (10 February 2016)

noco said:


> If the ABC is privatized it may root out the Fabians who run the show....But then again if it was privatized, the Fabians might take it over which in turn would be funded by the LUG party......The propaganda machine would be in full swing to promote socialism.....
> 
> No not a good idea to privatize....leave it under the limited control of the government.




Actually a good idea. They don't know how to run a business (that is not govt. sponsored) and therefore a good businessman will pick it up cheap. Problem solved.


----------



## Tisme (10 February 2016)

dutchie said:


> Actually a good idea. They don't know how to run a business (that is not govt. sponsored) and therefore a good businessman will pick it up cheap. Problem solved.




I seem to recall Trades Hall used to own quite a few radio stations, so the ABC might be a good fit for them... the ABC being a nursery for demons, gremlins, griffins, etc it would be a hand in glove fit and a triumph for free enterprise.


----------



## Tisme (10 February 2016)

Was he a lefty in July last year when Alan Jones presented himself as an alternative chair warmer when Fuhrer Abbott declared verboten to any of his ministers attending. Alan actually morphed into a kind off intelligent person with reasoned argument, not at all like the usual LNP fare.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> Was he a lefty in July last year when Alan Jones presented himself as an alternative chair warmer when Fuhrer Abbott declared verboten to any of his ministers attending. Alan actually morphed into a kind off intelligent person with reasoned argument, not at all like the usual LNP fare.




Maybe, but he did get some data about wind farms rather wrong.


----------



## dutchie (14 February 2016)

Not only is Insiders bias, it's actually boring.


----------



## noco (14 February 2016)

dutchie said:


> Not only is Insiders bias, it's actually boring.




I couldn't be bothered watching that crummy show...It is still so blatantly biased.....The Fabians propaganda machine for the LUG party.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2016)

noco said:


> I couldn't be bothered watching that crummy show...It is still so blatantly biased.....The Fabians propaganda machine for the LUG party.




So don't watch it.


----------



## noco (14 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So don't watch it.




I don't and neither does a lot of others....I just stated, I could not be bothered watching and as I said before it is the Fabian Society  propaganda machine for the LUG party....It is the socialist way of controlling the naive and they swallow it hook, line and sinker.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2016)

noco said:


> I don't and neither does a lot of others....I just stated, I could not be bothered watching and as I said before it is the Fabian Society  propaganda machine for the LUG party....It is the socialist way of controlling the naive and they swallow it hook, line and sinker.




Some prefer to swallow Murdoch and Bolt's propaganda, hook line and sinker.


----------



## Tink (1 March 2016)

I watched Q and A last night, regarding the safe school propaganda.

I was surprised they let through a few decent questions.
Too bad they don't answer them, and go on about something else.

If anyone is interested.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4402548.htm

Chaos in Australian Education 
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=25851&page=4&p=899102&viewfull=1#post899102


----------



## Logique (2 March 2016)

The bullying arrogance of Kerryn Phelps was staggering. Physician heal thyself!

Phelps and Anna Burke were heckling the poor guy from Christian Lobby in stereo, not a pretty sight..


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2016)

The question from the "innocent" child was fairly disturbing.

 It seemed that she wanted to shut down the whole gay marriage debate because a few people like her may not like what was being said.

It seems fairly typical of the gay lobby that they send out their trophy foot soldiers to put their case rather than having the guts to do it themselves.

This is an adult debate that should be discussed by adults and not shut down for perceived "offense", the opinions of children who are still dependent on their parents are irrelevant.


----------



## noco (2 March 2016)

Logique said:


> The bullying arrogance of Kerryn Phelps was staggering. Physician heal thyself!
> 
> Phelps and Anna Burke were heckling the poor guy from Christian Lobby in stereo, not a pretty sight..




Going against my principles of watching QandA, It did watch some until I became totally disgusted at the way Karan Phelps, Anna Burke and the predominately stacked left wing audience heckled Lyle Shelton...When Phelps spoke there overwhelming cheering and clapping as opposed to when Shelton spoke he was ridiculed.

This is an age old method by Marxist, Communist or Fabians, what ever you want to call them, to not only to ruin a countries economy as we saw between 2007 and 2013 but also to break down the morals of young people by clouding their minds with sex.

And of course the Catholic religion is not condoned by the Fabians, let alone other religions with exception of Islam, and they would rather see religion squashed.

1726 Catholic schools out of 1728 have rejected the latest system of sex education in schools.

Wake up Australia and stop these demons from promoting their extreme propaganda.  




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...m/news-story/4cb53ec9a0779aba50e30275b83ce01a

*Safe schools do not advise children how to access a sex shop site online. They do not teach children that virginity is a subjective concept. They do not instruct children to imagine they have no genitals — arguably a form of dissociation.

Yet the Safe Schools Coalition “All of Us” program, defended by Queer activist groups and the Left media, continues to receive government funding while promoting highly questionable sexual activism on the curriculum.

On Monday night’s Q&A, Australian Christian Lobby managing director Lyle Shelton argued against the Safe Schools Coalition program in response to a question by Cella White, a mother who withdrew her children from Frankston High School because of it. He attempted to evince his position by exposing radical elements of the program, but the audience looked bemused, as though it were a fiction. What they failed to grasp is the critical distinction between Queer, a term used as shorthand for the gay community and Queer politics, a radical movement that marked the rise of neo-Marxism in the realm of sexuality.

Consistent with neo-Marxist minority politics, the Safe Schools Coalition program has been funded on the rationale of victimhood. Ostensibly a program to counter bullying of youth who identify as lesbian, gay, intersex or transgender, it has been accepted in schools across Victoria with federal and Labor state government funding. But the program is not simply a defence of lesbian and gay youth, basic respect, or human equality. Its co-founder Roz Ward has admitted it is part of a Marxist social change strategy. We should be worried about the change to come, given program resources include practices associated with Queer politics such as sex industry shops, chest-binding and penis-tucking.*


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

Damn the ABC for its continued bias; now the Four Corners program is pointing fingers at the Banks and Insurance Industry ripping off customers.

Let's hope the Royal Commission that will come is as keen for scalps as it was for the Unions and not a cynical exercise like the Abuse of Children has been.


----------



## Logique (26 March 2016)

What are Clemmie Fords's qualifications to appear, for the second time, on ABC Q&A?

Panellists this week, Monday, 21 March 2016:
Daniel Andrews, Premier of Victoria; Jacqui Lambie, Independent Senator for Tasmania; Josh Frydenberg, Minister for Resources and Energy; Elizabeth Proust, Businesswoman and Chair, Bank of Melbourne.

And..Clementine Ford, Fairfax blogger and feminist speaker. The tattoed one.

What businesses has she run, what Senatorial posts occupied, which banks has she worked for, which Federal Ministerial posts occupied, which State has she governed.

Presumably she was there as political commissar, and along the way, to take a cowardly swipe at Peter Dutton.

This is _Their ABC_.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 March 2016)

Logique said:


> What are Clemmie Fords's qualifications to appear, for the second time, on ABC Q&A?
> 
> Panellists this week, Monday, 21 March 2016:
> Daniel Andrews, Premier of Victoria; Jacqui Lambie, Independent Senator for Tasmania; Josh Frydenberg, Minister for Resources and Energy; Elizabeth Proust, Businesswoman and Chair, Bank of Melbourne.
> ...




Agree about Clementine Ford. People make a few "contraversial" remarks and suddenly they are celebrities worthy of further listening to.

CF has shown she is a foul mouthed whinger , but looking at the show in hindsight I thought she didn't do too badly. However there are many more ladies much more capable of representing a female view than she is,


----------



## Logique (30 March 2016)

The ABC News 24 sports presenter 'Bridge', tells us this morning we should take more notice of the Socceroos achievements.

Which of course we should.

But poor 'Bridge' can't pronounce the names Postecoglou, Fornaroli (of Melb City) or Rogic.  

Only on the ABC.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 March 2016)

Logique said:


> The ABC News 24 sports presenter 'Bridge', tells us this morning we should take more notice of the Socceroos achievements.
> 
> Which of course we should.
> 
> ...




She is probably a tea lady given a "wish" while the regulars are on holidays.


----------



## Tisme (30 March 2016)

Logique said:


> The ABC News 24 sports presenter 'Bridge', tells us this morning we should take more notice of the Socceroos achievements.
> 
> Which of course we should.
> 
> ...




I resent our taxpayer monies being spent advocating for soccer. It's a divisive game that attracts low grade people who seem to be looking for a reason to get aggressive. And it seems there has been a rise in violence in AFL and NRL crowds since soccer became organised ....which means deads41ts are leaking into those sports too like disease.


----------



## noco (11 April 2016)

With the new broom, Michelle Guthrie, making some sweeping changes to the ABC, our dear friends from the left may at long last lose control of their Fabian propaganda machine.

There are some unhappy little Vegemites   whose wings are about to be clipped and not before time....

Get rid of QandA with Tony Jones and Insiders with Bary Cassidy who are so blatantly biased to the socialists.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e/news-story/56d60adf68416ad73e48c2e1da89b506


----------



## SirRumpole (11 April 2016)

noco said:


> With the new broom, Michelle Guthrie, making some sweeping changes to the ABC, our dear friends from the left may at long last lose control of their Fabian propaganda machine.
> 
> There are some unhappy little Vegemites   whose wings are about to be clipped and not before time....
> 
> ...




:sleeping:

[Joe, any chance of a Yawn emoticon ?  ]


----------



## Logique (11 April 2016)

noco said:


> With the new broom, Michelle Guthrie, making some sweeping changes to the ABC, our dear friends from the left may at long last lose control of their Fabian propaganda machine.
> There are some unhappy little Vegemites   whose wings are about to be clipped and not before time....
> Get rid of QandA with Tony Jones and Insiders with Bary Cassidy who are so blatantly biased to the socialists.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e/news-story/56d60adf68416ad73e48c2e1da89b506



Behind paywall. But not before time. 

The great Germaine herself is on Q & A tonight. But I wouldn't count on her toeing the ABC party line, she occasionally makes a bit of sense these days. There'll be no green landscape-pattern jumper or coiffed sisterhood hair, as we saw on _Offsiders_ last Sunday morning. 

Waleed spent a good amount of time correcting this panellist, who still managed to blurt out that _The Footy Show_ is sexist. No examples were quoted, nor (on the ABC) required. Probably miffed she didn't get the gig over Rebecca Maddern. And Waleed had probably given up by this stage.

Not that I'm any fan of _The Footy Show_ anyway.


----------



## noco (11 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> :sleeping:
> 
> [Joe, any chance of a Yawn emoticon ?  ]




Poor old Rumpy.....He is not happy things are changing in the ABC......But it will be for the best Rumpy....A change is like a holiday....sit back and enjoy it.

Hopefully we we now get some balance in ABC reporting.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 April 2016)

noco said:


> Hopefully we we now get some balance in ABC reporting.




I doubt it noco, Barrie Cassidy has had two government Ministers in a row on Insiders. I think he's a Liberal stooge.


----------



## noco (11 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I doubt it noco, Barrie Cassidy has had two government Ministers in a row on Insiders. I think he's a Liberal stooge.




Cassidy likes to have Liberals Ministers on his show so he can grill them in the hope they make a mistake or that they are  in conflict with Turnbull.......It is like a GOTHCA event......Of course when he has a Labor Shadow Minister on board, he gives them an easy ride.......It then becomes like a LOVE IN.

Do you get my drift?

It is the unbalanced panel that gets up my gizzet...Most times it is 3 from the left...Best at times it is 2 to 1.


----------



## dutchie (21 June 2016)

Tony Jones owned by Malcolm Turnbull.

(from BOLT)

"
When Mr Turnbull noted that Labor planned to run higher deficits over the next four years, [Q&A host Tony] Jones interrupted.

    “They would say ”” I have to jump in here ”” “ Jones said.

    “Of course you do. You have got to defend the Labor Party, Tony,” Mr Turnbull responded.

    “By raising tax revenue,” Jones continued. “By raising tax revenue. That’s how they say they’re going to do it.”

Mr Turnbull offered another pointed response, albeit with a smile: “I’ve never heard them explain it quite as well as you. You should do more work for them. You’re a very good spokesman for the ALP. Anyway, there you go.”
"

The Prime Minister knows that the ABC is biased to the Labor party.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Tony Jones owned by Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> (from BOLT)
> 
> ...




Tony Jones gave Bill Shorten a much harder time than he gave Malcolm Turnbull.


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2016)

dutchie said:


> Tony Jones owned by Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> (from BOLT)
> 
> ...




It was just unsophisticated baiting. Mal could do with a few hours on Brawl Hall to learn how it's done.

I think the ABC is more Greens than Labor and I bet there are plenty of Richard Carltons alive and kicking in there too. Malcolm is merely morphing into the Abbott stable of blame and attack to distract and deflect.

Tony will never get owned by someone of Malcolm's calibre, especially with Tony's imbedded celebrity status. it would take a Keating or Howard to give him pause.


----------



## noco (22 July 2016)

Tony Jones once again has shown his true colors on QandA with the invitation of Lebanese born Khaled Elomar who is a prospective Muslim radical, currently under the eye of the of AFP, willing to express his hatred for Australia, Israel and the US.

Last Monday's episode was a pure set up to ostracize and belittle Pauline Hanson. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...a/news-story/ecb3cd51338249f9d268615dbb8447d3

*They sure can pick ’em. We know the ABC’s flagship public forum, Q&A, tends to select panellists more for heat than light — which is a great pity given the paucity of intelligent debate in national affairs. Yet orchestrated set-ups and poor vetting of questioners are what really undermine its credibility. Despite production staffing that some commercial media can only dream of, Q&A is incapable of the most basic Google and social media checks on its questioners or it ignores what it finds for the sake of shock value.

This week’s show seemed designed to harangue One Nation leader Pauline Hanson on her return to the Senate. Host Tony Jones, panellists and, it seems, the studio audience were there not to discuss serious issues of Islamist extremism, Muslim immigration and community integration but to mock Ms Hanson’s simplistic solutions. One of the orchestrated confrontations came when Khaled Elomar asked a question invoking the concerns of his 11-year-old son. He asked if Ms Hanson was motivated by “hate, fear or ignorance” and said he feared for his son’s life.

Yet Mr Elomar’s social media posts are replete with hateful attacks on Ms Hanson, government and Israel. In one post he shows a picture of Ms Hanson in a kitchen and urges her to “go upper cut” herself. He included a mock-up of her in a hijab fronting “One Islamation” and posted a picture of Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie, saying she should wear a “niqab 24/7” because she was “Far Too Ugly”. Mr Elomar said Ms Hanson’s rise had made life in Sydney’s Cronulla more difficult. “Almost every day I get called a Muslim pig because of you,” he said to Ms Hanson. Yet his posts regularly attack Israel, the US and Ms Hanson. The social media posts were available for the ABC to check. They included conspiracies about the CIA and terrorism, and abuse such as “F..k the Australian government”.

There have been many reviews into the ABC, even a specific review of Q&A, there have been restructures and even a new managing director, but the public broadcaster continues on its merry, unaccountable, green-Left way, as often undermining as facilitating sensible national debate. It is sad.

*


----------



## Tisme (22 July 2016)

noco said:


> Tony Jones once again has shown his true colors on QandA with the invitation of Lebanese born Khaled Elomar who is a prospective Muslim radical, currently under the eye of the of AFP, willing to express his hatred for Australia, Israel and the US.
> 
> Last Monday's episode was a pure set up to ostracize and belittle Pauline Hanson.
> 
> ...




Why do you take umbrage at programs that don't follow you politics Noco? Surely you would be the first to champion democracy and freedom of opinions? Pauline can handle herself and we all knew the audience would be primed to give her a hard time, but didn't you notice over the hour how less and less noisy the audience became .... I think she won some support for the novel idea of One Ocker Nation Under the Trinity God.


----------



## noco (22 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Why do you take umbrage at programs that don't follow you politics Noco? Surely you would be the first to champion democracy and freedom of opinions? Pauline can handle herself and we all knew the audience would be primed to give her a hard time, but didn't you notice over the hour how less and less noisy the audience became .... I think she won some support for the novel idea of One Ocker Nation Under the Trinity God.




The ABC is paid for with tax payer dollars and should be impartial.....How can it be impartial when it is controlled by Labor and the Greens?

Labor and the Greens use it to spread their lies and propaganda and it is time the Government brought them into line to follow their charter or else get rid of those who disregard the ABC charter.....This all part of Socialism...Control the media and you control the people.

It has nothing to do with me taking umbrage or my politics and yes, I champion freedom of speech and the true values in life but the ABC are just ignoring the charter.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think she won some support for the novel idea of One Ocker Nation Under the Trinity God.




She did ok, but the idea of bias is absurd.

If politicians can't answer hard questions then they are not worth their salt.


----------



## Tisme (22 July 2016)

noco said:


> The ABC is paid for with tax payer dollars and should be impartial.....How can it be impartial when it is controlled by Labor and the Greens?
> 
> Labor and the Greens use it to spread their lies and propaganda and it is time the Government brought them into line to follow their charter or else get rid of those who disregard the ABC charter.....This all part of Socialism...Control the media and you control the people.
> 
> It has nothing to do with me taking umbrage or my politics and yes, I champion freedom of speech and the true values in life but the ABC are just ignoring the charter.




If impartial means censorship, I doubt any ABC charter would incorporate that principle


----------



## noco (22 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> If impartial means censorship, I doubt any ABC charter would incorporate that principle




Maybe if they get some balance in the ABC things might be different.

While there is some 41% Greens and 31% Labor journos you can only expect the same.


----------



## Tisme (2 September 2016)

Virginia had guest Steve Silberman on this morning to talk about autism and bothered with his homosexuality instead. I wonder if Hugh Jackman would be asked if he was in the seat?


----------



## dutchie (2 September 2016)

Not only biased but stupid!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrvNwIhlDwU


----------



## Tisme (3 September 2016)

dutchie said:


> Not only biased but stupid!
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrvNwIhlDwU




Yeah I watched that on the day. Really stretching the boundaries with that one.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2016)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...iotic-broadcasting-corporation-speech/7923632



> New South Wales senator Brian Burston has criticised multiculturalism and Muslim immigration in his maiden speech to Federal Parliament.
> 
> He also called for an investigation into the jailing of party founder Pauline Hanson in 2003.
> 
> ...


----------



## Knobby22 (12 October 2016)

Red Symons on the ABC used the term "maiden speech". He was pulled up by Raff Epstein. The official wording now is now "first speech". 

How long before the words "maiden over " in Cricket is banned?

I mentioned it to my wife (sorry partner) and she couldn't believe it.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Red Symons on the ABC used the term "maiden speech". He was pulled up by Raff Epstein. The official wording now is now "first speech".
> 
> How long before the words "maiden over " in Cricket is banned?
> 
> I mentioned it to my wife (sorry partner) and she couldn't believe it.




Utopian thinking that a wife automatically translates into a bi-partnership. It would be a brave man to think himself equal in the gains/losses duopoly dept.

Classic example of what started out as a comic flippancy of correcting gender pronouns in the late eighties, that grew legs and became an entity in itself;  fed by every mouse that roared with an axe to grind about the unfairness of their pathetic existence.

We are trapped in the net of an omnipotent notion that has deity status. Mass hysteria that won't go away.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 October 2016)

Speaking of the ABC  I'm getting a bit sick of their bleating about women's rights and indigenous rights.

We had almost the ultimate warrior on yesterday , a black women liberationist speaking about a survey that purports to show that many women are pessimistic that they will be able to find their "dream job" when they leave school or uni (assuming that they will actually get to go there and not be shoved out of the way by the male hordes).

Well guess what, shattered illusions are not the exclusive domain of females, many males graduate from uni and find themselves sweeping the streets. It's the way society is going.

And maybe girls are pessimistic because the sisterhood in the media tells them that they should be, like the media runs scare stories about horrific crimes that get people worried they they will become victims, even though the stats show crime is decreasing. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-11/are-girls-and-young-women-treated-equally-in-australia/7918700


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Speaking of the ABC  I'm getting a bit sick of their bleating about women's rights and indigenous rights.
> 
> We had almost the ultimate warrior on yesterday , a black women liberationist speaking about a survey that purports to show that many women are pessimistic that they will be able to find their "dream job" when they leave school or uni (assuming that they will actually get to go there and not be shoved out of the way by the male hordes).
> 
> ...




I think the real warriors have moved on to other ventures and the rear guard is trying to keep the fires going. All the right ideas, just poor product packaging and quality these days..... boring and given an audience by the ABC pointy heads who still pick an intellectual fight against a visceral enemy who is too busy working or no longer cares that much.


----------



## noco (12 October 2016)

If the Green/Labor coalition under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd have been able to stack the ABC with 41% Green and 32% Labor journalist, why can't this lazy Turnbull Government reverse it?

Control the media (ABC) and you can control the naÃ¯ve people with the propaganda the Fabian way.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2016)

noco said:


> If the Green/Labor coalition under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd have been able to stack the ABC with 41% Green and 32% Labor journalist, why can't this lazy Turnbull Government reverse it?
> 
> Control the media (ABC) and you can control the naÃ¯ve people with the propaganda the Fabian way.




I disagree with you on the "stacking" Noco. The ABC is a natural haven for the social conscience types who are drawn to it. The ABC does not have an imperative for profit and a free enterprise ethos, so it doesn't have to balance it's own opinions with the general 50/50 attitude of the population. It sees itself as an intellectual nursery.

The challenge is to get the topics discussed to relate to the populations expectations, not allow the expectation of the ABC few to argue and cajole the population. 

The ABC is very bigoted in its sense of right versus wrong.


----------



## noco (12 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I disagree with you on the "stacking" Noco. The ABC is a natural haven for the social conscience types who are drawn to it. The ABC does not have an imperative for profit and a free enterprise ethos, so it doesn't have to balance it's own opinions with the general 50/50 attitude of the population. It sees itself as an intellectual nursery.
> 
> The challenge is to get the topics discussed to relate to the populations expectations, not allow the expectation of the ABC few to argue and cajole the population.
> 
> The ABC is very bigoted in its sense of right versus wrong.




So can you explain to me why the ABC is so biased towards the Green/Labor coalition  socialist party when  it is clearly spelt  out in  the terms of their charter.......The ABC is just thumbing their nose at it all. 

I just do not understand why the Turnbull Government does not pull them into line and in particular Tony Jones on QandA.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2016)

noco said:


> So can you explain to me why the ABC is so biased towards the Green/Labor coalition  socialist party when  it is clearly spelt  out in  the terms of their charter.......The ABC is just thumbing their nose at it all.
> 
> I just do not understand why the Turnbull Government does not pull them into line and in particular Tony Jones on QandA.




I think the ALP and Greens run after the coat tails of the ABC, not the other way around.


----------



## noco (12 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think the ALP and Greens run after the coat tails of the ABC, not the other way around.




Yes you are dead right so perhaps the Turnbull Government should put the cleaners through the top brass of the ABC.......Surely they have some say being a tax payer funded organization.


----------



## explod (12 October 2016)

noco said:


> Yes you are dead right so perhaps the Turnbull Government should put the cleaners through the top brass of the ABC.......Surely they have some say being a tax payer funded organization.




Just your style ole Pal.  Get the Libs to interfere in the free press. As if they don't, fffeuuww.

Strewth, Chris Ulman when the storm in SA hit was right behind the Prime Minister when they initially tried to blame the windmills for the power outage.

And on a Suday on ABC radio you now cannot get past religious guru's trying to ram God down our throats.  And Macca On A Sunday morning on the denial of climate change sounds just like you noco.

So you just want to lock all of us up that do not agree with you and throw away the key.

Hottest recorded 15 years have occurred since the year 2000.


----------



## noco (12 October 2016)

explod said:


> Just your style ole Pal.  Get the Libs to interfere in the free press. As if they don't, fffeuuww.
> 
> Strewth, Chris Ulman when the storm in SA hit was right behind the Prime Minister when they initially tried to blame the windmills for the power outage.
> 
> ...




There has been no increase in Global warming in the past 10 years.


http://www.southwestclimatechange.org/blog/14420
:topic

*Climate scientists know the energy is going somewhere other than the atmosphere because the imbalance continues and temperatures have not warmed in the last 10 years. The energy could be warming the land and/or melting ice or snow, but these sinks traditionally have played minor roles in the flow of energy.  The best candidate is the ocean, which can suck up a lot of energy in the form of heat. The deep ocean in particular is a good sink and it can accumulate heat in numerous ways, including deceased sinking of Arctic surface waters during the winter and increased mixing of tropical water that allows warm surface water to sink.*


----------



## noco (12 October 2016)

explod said:


> Just your style ole Pal.  Get the Libs to interfere in the free press. As if they don't, fffeuuww.




Are you saying the ABC is not biased?

Geez, you could have fooled me.

If it had been the other way around, you would hear the Green/Labor coalition socialists screaming from the roof tops.


----------



## explod (13 October 2016)

noco said:


> Are you saying the ABC is not biased?
> 
> Geez, you could have fooled me.
> 
> If it had been the other way around, you would hear the Green/Labor coalition socialists screaming from the roof tops.




Interestingly the Greens do not ever scream.  Spoilt children scream and kick also if they don't get their own way.  The Greens have evolved a party system of consultation for consensus.  

Your reactions are interesting.

And yes the ABC used to present news in an unbiased manner but it is clear the multinational lobby groups are in control now.  Ulman in particular.


----------



## noco (13 October 2016)

explod said:


> Interestingly the Greens do not ever scream.  Spoilt children scream and kick also if they don't get their own way.  The Greens have evolved a party system of consultation for consensus.
> 
> Your reactions are interesting.
> 
> And yes the ABC used to present news in an unbiased manner but it is clear the multinational lobby groups are in control now.  Ulman in particular.




No the Greens never scream they just walk out of parliament if Pauline Hanson goes against their trend.

The Greens don't believe in free speech ...It is their way or no way.

The Greens expect every one to fall into line with what they say and want....

The Greens have certainly got the Labor Party by the short and curlies.

The Greens have stuffed South Australia and now they are headed for Queensland to do the same thing.

The Greens want to blow up the coal fired power stations, close the coal mines and create havoc with electricity prices and failures.


----------



## wayneL (13 October 2016)

Greens never scream?

Two words plod - Hansen-Young.


----------



## explod (13 October 2016)

wayneL said:


> Greens never scream?
> 
> Two words plod - Hansen-Young.




Sarah Hanson Young is one of the best representatives in politics today.  She speaks from the heart and is not controlled by others.  She does not conform to the content devoid political robots under big business.

And the dumb male dominator's don't like it one bit.

If we had more think for themselves parliamentarians we could perhaps recover democracy.


----------



## explod (13 October 2016)

noco said:


> No the Greens never scream they just walk out of parliament if Pauline Hanson goes against their trend.
> 
> The Greens don't believe in free speech ...It is their way or no way.
> 
> ...




And what's wrong with any of that and surely you don't for the life of me agree with Pauline Hanson.  

Spare my days.:1zhelp:


----------



## noco (13 October 2016)

explod said:


> And what's wrong with any of that and surely you don't for the life of me agree with Pauline Hanson.
> 
> Spare my days.:1zhelp:




Pauline will get my vote way before the Greens thank you...Like or lump it...Please your self.

Pauline is saying what 500,000 other people would like to say.

Lets see how many seats she will get at the next Queensland state election 2018 in comparison to the Green vote....I think you Greenies might be in shock at the result 

:aus::bs::headshake


----------



## wayneL (13 October 2016)

explod said:


> Sarah Hanson Young is one of the best representatives in politics today.  She speaks from the heart and is not controlled by others.  She does not conform to the content devoid political robots under big business.
> 
> And the dumb male dominator's don't like it one bit.
> 
> If we had more think for themselves parliamentarians we could perhaps recover democracy.




Talented spin, but, bull5hit.

She's a shrill nutter... Jayzuz


----------



## noco (13 October 2016)

wayneL said:


> Talented spin, but, bull5hit.
> 
> She's a shrill nutter... Jayzuz




What has she done for a Australia apart from wanting to open our borders to boat people smugglers and create havoc with the Labor Party for renewable energy which is now proving a failure.

She spat the dummy when she lost the Shadow Immigration portfolio.......She was demoted ....


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

The ABC has been discredited again and showing very little sign of accurate and honest reporting.....It is discerning that this taxpayer funded organisation is still attempting to get away with their Fabian (socialist...communism) injected propaganda.

The ABC are so blatantly  biased, even blind Freddie can see through them.

Time for the government to take some action.......Chop off their funds or privatise them.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e/news-story/f80ceeb432f4ec5907a10beff3697877


*The ABC has endured excoriating criticism of its flagship current *affairs program, Four Corners, after Monday’s episode about refugee children on Nauru was found to include old photographs of facilities no longer in use, and random footage of brawling adults, previously published on YouTube by a user known only as “NoRulz”. 

During intense questioning at Senate estimates yesterday, ABC editorial director Alan Sunderland admitted the ABC did not film the footage that went to air on Monday night, but said he was satisfied the vision was “appropriate” for a program devoted to the lives of refugee children on Nauru.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton last night accused the ABC of irresponsibility and said Four Corners had declined to use new photos and videos, offered by his office, of schools upgraded at a cost of $8.3 million.

The Australian has established that the program included what appears to be random footage of a group of men on Nauru hitting each other with steel poles that can also be found on a YouTube channel run by NoRulz.

On YouTube, the footage is in a video called “Who Let The Dogs Out”. It is one of a series of fight videos posted by NoRulz, who has also posted clips called “Nauru **** **** Fight” and “Batud the Deadly”.

The ABC used the footage to *illustrate the Four Corners argument that Nauru is a violent *society where refugees feel unsafe, because they have witnessed and been subjected to acts of violence.*


----------



## Tisme (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> The ABC has been discredited again




It's standing by it's footage


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> It's standing by it's footage




And where did you get idea from?

*The Nauru government said: "There are fights in Australian schools on a daily basis (and) the Australian news shows acts of crime each night that are far more violent that anything Nauru has experienced.

“This report was an embarrassment to journalism. From start to finish it was denigrating, racist, false and pure political activism.”

The Four Corners program was based on an Amnesty International report that claims that Australia's regional processing regime on Nauru amounts to torture.

Malcolm Turnbull denied this on ABC radio yesterday, saying: "I reject that claim totally. It is absolutely false.”*


----------



## Tisme (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> And where did you get idea from?




The ABC


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> The ABC




But the ABC has been found  stretching the truth again....They have been discredited.......Of course the ABC have no alternative but to stand by their report.....What you really expect them to do...apologize?.....Pigs might fly too.


----------



## Tisme (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> But the ABC has been found  stretching the truth again....They have been discredited.......Of course the ABC have no alternative but to stand by their report.....What you really expect them to do...apologize?.....Pigs might fly too.




I wasn't endorsing their position or arguing it either way, just that they announced on the breakfast news they stood by their content.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2016)

> The Four Corners program was based on an Amnesty International report that claims that Australia's regional processing regime on Nauru amounts to torture.
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull denied this on ABC radio yesterday, saying: "I reject that claim totally. It is absolutely false.”




Whether indefinite detention is "torture" is a matter of opinion either way. Just because the PM says it isn't so doesn't make him correct. In fact he would only know if he has been through that experience himself, and he hasn't.


----------



## bellenuit (19 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Whether indefinite detention is "torture" is a matter of opinion either way. Just because the PM says it isn't so doesn't make him correct. In fact he would only know if he has been through that experience himself, and he hasn't.




But they are not in detention, as has been pointed out. They are free to roam about Nauru.


----------



## drsmith (19 October 2016)

This isn't the first time the ABC has burnt its hands with its coverage of asylum seeker issues.

It doesn't seem to care though.


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Whether indefinite detention is "torture" is a matter of opinion either way. Just because the PM says it isn't so doesn't make him correct. In fact he would only know if he has been through that experience himself, and he hasn't.




Can you really associate the true meaning of torture and relate it to refugees living on Nauru.

Those people are free to roam the island at will.....Some have set up their own business and some have jobs.....They have good schooling for the kids and a health system which would be the envy of the world.

Are they inflicted with pain of torture as described in the link below?

Of course they are not....Just more dirty propaganda from the socialist left ABC....What ever it takes to discredit the Turnbull government.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/torture

:crap:


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> Can you really associate the true meaning of torture and relate it to refugees living on Nauru.
> 
> Those people are free to roam the island at will.....Some have set up their own business and some have jobs.....They have good schooling for the kids and a health system which would be the envy of the world.
> 
> ...




Some data please on how many have set up business and have jobs.

Torture can also be pyschological as well as physical.


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Some data please on how many have set up business and have jobs.
> 
> Torture can also be pyschological as well as physical.




It was a news item I observed some weeks ago. I will continue to do some research for you if you are too lazy to do it yourself.

Psychological is normally the result of physical pain.

http://www.nauru-news.com/


----------



## explod (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> It was a news item I observed some weeks ago. I will continue to do some research for you if you are too lazy to do it yourself.
> 
> Psychological is normally the result of physical pain.
> 
> http://www.nauru-news.com/




Psychological damage comes from fear and stress.


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

Did any of you from the Green/Labor socialist left coalition read in full this statement from the Nauru government or was it too much to accept how wrong the ABC has been?

*Statement from the Government of Nauru – Re: Four Corners Oct 17, 2016

Last night’s Four Corners program on the ABC was yet another example of the ABC’s biased political propaganda and lies, and was an insult to the people of Nauru.



It was clear that these children were coached, and that the entire process of filming the refugees was stage-managed, as the program has not been to Nauru. Despite this, viewers could clearly see that the refugees featured were well dressed, well-groomed and healthy. We know they will say anything to influence the Australian Government to bring them to Australia - a goal that motivated them to pay large amounts of money to people smugglers – which includes making false claims against the Nauruan people.



The program, which did not seek comment from the Government of Nauru before going to air, misrepresented the facts and allowed Save the Children – a discredited organisation that had a clear agenda when on Nauru – to make wild and unsubstantiated claims.



No child is in detention on Nauru, and children live with their families in safe and comfortable accommodation, mostly in new housing close to shops, facilities and beaches. Nauru is not a violent country and has a crime rate lower than Australia. There are fights in Australian schools on a daily basis and there is crime in Australia. The Australian news shows acts of crime each night that are far more violent that anything Nauru has experienced; so on this basis, Four Corners should be campaigning for no refugees to be allowed into such a violent society as Australia. Clearly they would not advocate this because it would – in context – be incorrect, yet they are willing to falsely portray Nauru as an unsafe nation, which it is not.



The program showed incorrect pictures of schools in a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the facts, while not mentioning the educational facilities across Nauru that are similar to Australian schools, not speaking to any Nauruan educators or principals, and not showing the new school that was recently completed. It also missed the point that if Nauruan schools are good enough for our children, why are they not for refugee children? 



In the same way the program showed the old Nauru hospital which is no longer in operation, and failed to mention the new $27 million state of the art medical facility to which refugees have unrestricted and free access.



This report was an embarrassment to journalism. From start to finish it was denigrating, racist, false and pure political activism.
*


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2016)

bellenuit said:


> But they are not in detention, as has been pointed out. They are free to roam about Nauru.




Silly me.


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> Did any of you from the Green/Labor socialist left coalition read in full this statement from the Nauru government or was it too much to accept how wrong the ABC has been?
> 
> *Statement from the Government of Nauru – Re: Four Corners Oct 17, 2016
> 
> ...




So who is right?.....The ABC or the Nauruan Government.......I know who I am willing to believe.


----------



## noco (19 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Some data please on how many have set up business and have jobs.
> 
> Torture can also be pyschological as well as physical.




Some refugees have been given 5 year working visas and are free to move around the Island and seek employment.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-22/first-refugees-on-nauru-released-and-granted-visas/5469244

*Nauru's government says refugees who resettle in the community are free to move around the island and seek employment.*


----------



## luutzu (19 October 2016)

noco said:


> Some refugees have been given 5 year working visas and are free to move around the Island and seek employment.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-22/first-refugees-on-nauru-released-and-granted-visas/5469244
> 
> *Nauru's government says refugees who resettle in the community are free to move around the island and seek employment.*




Poor people likes nothing more than having refugees roaming around taking their jobs.


----------



## noco (20 October 2016)

noco said:


> So who is right?.....The ABC or the Nauruan Government.......I know who I am willing to believe.




Still waiting for answers from the Green/Labor socialist left supporters on their opinion of their beloved biased ABC.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2016)

noco said:


> Still waiting for answers from the Green/Labor socialist left supporters on their opinion of their beloved biased ABC.




What's the point, you wouldn't take any notice anyway.

Of course the Nauru government would never lie, cover up or distort the truth would it ?


----------



## noco (20 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What's the point, you wouldn't take any notice anyway.
> 
> Of course the Nauru government would never lie, cover up or distort the truth would it ?




Not only does your beloved ABC lie but you can also include on your list the Senior Director of Amnesty International, Anna Neistat...She has been caught out and admitted to it.

It is a pity these do-gooders from the ABC and Amnesty International didn't divert some of their energy into woman and child abuse in other parts of the world instead of trying to discredit the Australian Government on Nauru.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s/news-story/9b306ec44d4f581581a4e9d9866860a7

:fan


*The lead author of the Amnesty International report alleging widespread abuse and neglect of asylum-seekers in Australian-sponsored facilities on Nauru made misleading claims on child suicide and drownings at sea.

Amnesty senior researcher Anna Neistat admitted yesterday that, contrary to her claim on the ABC’s Lateline program this week, no child asylum-seeker on Nauru had committed suicide.

In an interview with The Australian, Ms Neistat also conceded that, contrary to the impression she gave in that interview, no asylum-seekers were known to have drowned trying to reach Australia or as a result of turnbacks since the Coalition introduced its stop-the-boats policy in late 2013.

Ms Neistat was one of the subjects interviewed by the ABC’s Four Corners program on asylum-seekers on Nauru entitled The Forgotten Children, which aired on Monday night, a program widely criticised by the government for alleged inaccuracies, misleading footage and imbalance.

The ABC issued a statement yesterday standing by the prog*ram and denying claims that Australian departmental officers had offered images or footage to Four Corners of current facilities on Nauru, as opposed to older material* run by the program.

The Australian has seen an email chain indicating a media spokesman in the office of Immigration and Border Protection Minister Peter Dutton had offered Four Corners recent footage of new school facilities on Nauru last Thursday.

An ABC spokeswoman said that was “clearly not within the timeframe of the report” and added no footage in the program had been provided by Amnesty.

The Amnesty report, Island of Despair, which claims to “reveal the full scale of Australia’s system of deliberate cruelty” on Nauru, covers much of the same territory as the Four Corners program, and Amnesty set a media embargo for its report of 8.30pm AEDT on Monday, as Four Corners aired.

Ms Neistat said while Amnesty and the ABC knew of each other’s activities, they were independent, and the timing of the embargo was due to international media considerations, not any request from Four Corners.

In the interview on Lateline, Ms Neistat said: “I spoke to many children, many of whom talked about wanting to commit suicide — some of them have.” But she conceded to The Australian *yesterday that no asylum-seeker children on Nauru had taken their own lives.

Ms Neistat said that during the several days she spent on Nauru, she had spoken to two boys, aged nine and 13, who said they had *attempted suicide, and to the sister of a 13-year-old girl who said she had also tried to take her own life.

“They attempted to commit suicide, they didn’t die,” Ms *Neistat said. In the Lateline interview, she had tried to counter the *assertion from the government that it had stopped the boats and drownings.

“Let’s not kid ourselves, the boats haven’t stopped coming, they just don’t sink at the Australian shores any more, they are pushed back at earlier stages and people do continue to die at sea.”

But she conceded that while one vessel from Vietnam had been stopped by Australian authorities in June and its 21 passengers flown back, “in this case they didn’t die”.*

Please read the readers comments if the Australian allows you.


----------



## noco (20 October 2016)

The Immigration Minister, Peter Dutton, offered the ABC updates of a new school and a modern updated hospital on Nauru and the ABC refused to use it preferring instead to use clips that were 2 years old......The ABC wanted to use maximum propaganda to discredit the government and it has all back fired on the ABC.

I say stop the ABC  funding until they change their attitude. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ebcd54563ff662b824fcbd7ff0bd2#U60880373850MwC


*Activists ‘taken over’ the ABC: Dutton

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has taken aim at the Four Corners program, saying he will write to ABC managing director Michelle Guthrie to formally complain about what he says is a political crusade being waged by the public broadcaster.

Peter Dutton. Picture: AAP
Peter Dutton. Picture: AAP

Mr Dutton today warned the ABC was being taken over by political operatives, accusing them of running stories without doing fact checks or providing a balanced perspective on the government’s border protection regimen.

He said that refugee activists had “completely taken over” and now “owned and operated the place.”

The Australian has revealed that Monday night’s episode about refugee children on Nauru was found to have included old photographs of facilities no longer in use and random footage of brawling adults, previously published on YouTube by a user known as “NoRulz.”

“The ABC has a lot to answer for here,” Mr Dutton told 2GB radio. “We had offered to provide information to Four Corners, to the ABC. They didn’t run it.

“We had offered to provide answers to questions, and to provide them with information that they could use as part of their program. They didn’t take up the offer.”

Mr Dutton also said his offer to do a live interview on the program was denied. “They decided that that wasn’t acceptable to them.

“It was so one-sided and slanted I think the managing director of the ABC has a lot to answer for here and I think it was shabby journalism to say the least.

Michelle Guthrie. Picture: AAP
Michelle Guthrie. Picture: AAP

“They’ve turned themselves into political operatives and it’s unacceptable for the national broadcaster.

“They should be factually based, these stories, and they shouldn’t be based on emotions and lies ... It’s an embarrassment that our national broadcaster would carry on the way that they have.

“I’m going to write to the managing director and detail our concerns ... but downloading stories off YouTube and running them as somehow factually based is just a nonsense.”

And on Triggs:

Mr Dutton told 2GB radio that Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs needed to address “very serious allegations” that she had misled the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee.

“They are obviously issues that she would need to address very quickly,” Mr Dutton said. “They are very serious allegations …. It is an office with great prestige in the commonwealth. She would have to clear this up very quickly as it goes to her character.”

FacebookTwitterGPlus*


----------



## noco (23 October 2016)

It is about time the ABC came under scrutiny on their bias.

Government Ministers including the Prime Minister should be knocking on the ABC door every time there is misinformation given......They are so blatant with their bias.....They stand out like the proverbial country out house.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...t/news-story/805373a056fe068beb54c177112141ef

*Communications Minister Mitch Fifield will complain to ABC managing director Michelle Guthrie about a Four Corners documentary on Nauru, saying he has concerns about the national broadcaster’s coverage.

Speaking on Sky News this morning, Senator Fifield said the ABC’s decision to turn down an interview offer from Immigration Minister Peter Dutton on last week’s Four Corners program on Nauru was “odd”.

He said he was “troubled” by the refusal to air a response from the Coalition, and would be contacting the ABC’s new managing director to share his concerns.

“I haven’t yet raised it (the issue) with Michelle Guthrie, but I certainly will be — absolutely,” he said.

Last week, Mr Dutton said the national broadcaster had been “drinking the Kool-Aid” and was campaigning against government policy, indicating he would also be writing to Ms Guthrie to raise his concerns.

“We had offered to provide answers to questions and provide them with information that they could use as part of their program, they didn’t take me up on the offer,” Mr Dutton said.

The ABC has defended the program that detailed complaints from some of the 755 asylum-seekers living on the island as “accurate, well-researched (and) well-produced”.*


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2016)

I seem to recall Richard Carlton was an ABC product, replete with his bucket of supercilious grins and right wing bias.

I still think back on him and Hawke


----------



## dutchie (9 November 2016)

Trioli has to go.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Melania-s-breast-says-Americans-IQ-test.html


----------



## Tisme (9 November 2016)

dutchie said:


> Trioli has to go.
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Melania-s-breast-says-Americans-IQ-test.html




Damn I missed that. Would have been funny stuff and probably true. (I am no fan of Virginia)


----------



## pixel (10 November 2016)

dutchie said:


> Trioli has to go.
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Melania-s-breast-says-Americans-IQ-test.html




BS ! Storm in a glass of water. 
It was just some harmless female locker room talk


----------



## SirRumpole (10 November 2016)

pixel said:


> BS ! Storm in a glass of water.
> It was just some harmless female locker room talk




Nice one !


----------



## Tink (10 November 2016)

I think it is time the ABC conceded, they are out of touch with mainstream.

Every prediction has been wrong, while they push their own agenda.


----------



## noco (10 November 2016)

Tink said:


> I think it is time the ABC conceded, they are out of touch with mainstream.
> 
> Every prediction has been wrong, while they push their own agenda.




The ABC is riddled with Fabians...It is about time JELLY MALLY brought them to heel....Bring the ABC back to the reality of their charter or alternatively cut their funding.


----------



## Logique (10 November 2016)

dutchie said:


> Trioli has to go.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Melania-s-breast-says-Americans-IQ-test.html



_La Trioli_'s male co-host would already be off air, if he'd said it


----------



## qldfrog (17 November 2016)

And here we are at it again, being aboriginal should allow you to publish any crap on Apple otherwise Apple is a symbol of colonialism...Welcome to the world wo welfare and preferred treatment Lady.
Here comes the next bleeding heart battle..Pathetic but your ABC is here to save the day..
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-17/apple-drops-indigenous-app-creator-warns-of-digital-colonisation/8032904


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> And here we are at it again, being aboriginal should allow you to publish any crap on Apple otherwise Apple is a symbol of colonialism...Welcome to the world wo welfare and preferred treatment Lady.
> Here comes the next bleeding heart battle..Pathetic but your ABC is here to save the day..
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-17/apple-drops-indigenous-app-creator-warns-of-digital-colonisation/8032904




I agree that was a political story. The Prime Minister got a free plug he didn't deserve.


----------



## qldfrog (18 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree that was a political story. The Prime Minister got a free plug he didn't deserve.




Not political as ALP vs LNP; but Jesus, we live in the real world and news after news like that beamed into the brains of the people with no options in aboriginal communities or in our leftist create a class of people living in a surreal world, voting and deciding where my taxes go.
I have apps published in Apple/Android world, not games either and I can assure you that the whole complaint story is BS; moreover I would be keen to know the level of grants/assistance etc from my taxes that product got from the collonialists....
Anyway, I am white, not muslim, working and paying taxes,  and not LGxxxxxxxx so why should anyone care until the next Trump/Brexit/Pauline....or worse to come
You would think  a lesson would have been taught


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Not political as ALP vs LNP; but Jesus, we live in the real world and news after news like that beamed into the brains of the people with no options in aboriginal communities or in our leftist create a class of people living in a surreal world, voting and deciding where my taxes go.
> I have apps published in Apple/Android world, not games either and I can assure you that the whole complaint story is BS; moreover I would be keen to know the level of grants/assistance etc from my taxes that product got from the collonialists....
> Anyway, I am white, not muslim, working and paying taxes,  and not LGxxxxxxxx so why should anyone care until the next Trump/Brexit/Pauline....or worse to come
> You would think  a lesson would have been taught




Calm down Froggy, there must be a beautiful day out there somewhere.


Actually I'm getting a bit sick of the ABC too. Whining aborigines, whining women moaning about the "glass ceiling", whining gays and lesbians, it does tend to fray the nerves.

 I'd still trust their journalistic abilities over the commercial channels, but it's obvious that these are being dumbed down. TV reporters who look as though they are just out of school and seem picked for their ethniticity or photogenity. Dumbed down writing in online news stories too. But then I reckon that the Coalition cutbacks are aiming for this sort of effect, to devalue the ABC and then defund it totally. And that would be a bad thing imo.


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Calm down Froggy, there must be a beautiful day out there somewhere.
> 
> 
> Actually I'm getting a bit sick of the ABC too. Whining aborigines, whining women moaning about the "glass ceiling", whining gays and lesbians, it does tend to fray the nerves.
> ...




Remember the problems we had on QANDA with what we could express? 

I noticed the latest prime time viewing includes that gay idiot with a mangled Irish accent (he was born and raised around the corner from me in Oz) in a "comedy" complete with bed scenes of male homosexuals. That's our money being spent by executives on a voyerism of social engineering for mainstream acceptance. 

I would love to be a fly on the wall in Virginia's house when her one and only puts out to the same sex crowd after being raised to be blind to his natural role.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Remember the problems we had on QANDA with what we could express?




That's another thing that irks me. The ABC has now removed all reader comments from the online site, and they were the most informative (and occasionally funny) parts of the Drum online. It's as if the ABC doesn't give a damn about what we think any more, but I'm inclined to believe that financial cutbacks have resulted in the moderators being laid off.



> I noticed the latest prime time viewing includes that gay idiot with a mangled Irish accent (he was born and raised around the corner from me in Oz) in a "comedy" complete with bed scenes of male homosexuals. That's our money being spent by executives on a voyerism of social engineering for mainstream acceptance.




I don't watch ABC drama these days, I find most of it puerile.


----------



## noco (18 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> That's another thing that irks me. The ABC has now removed all reader comments from the online site, and they were the most informative (and occasionally funny) parts of the Drum online. It's as if the ABC doesn't give a damn about what we think any more, but I'm inclined to believe that financial cutbacks have resulted in the moderators being laid off.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't watch ABC drama these days, I find most of it puerile.




We need a Donald Trump here to rid the ABC of the 41% Greens and 32% Labor stooges and only then can we get some balance in honest reporting.

According to the Fabian ideology .......Control the media and you will control the people....


----------



## wayneL (18 November 2016)

I'm confused,  what's wrong with the app? 

There are hundreds of useless apps with limited audience. Could she be right?


----------



## noco (18 November 2016)

noco said:


> We need a Donald Trump here to rid the ABC of the 41% Greens and 32% Labor stooges and only then can we get some balance in honest reporting.
> 
> According to the Fabian ideology .......Control the media and you will control the people....




People are finally waking up to the way the media, and in particular the ABC, who try to control with persuasion the way people think and live......Control the way people should vote politically.

It is now all starting to back fire here, the UK and in the USA and that is why the left are in shock and horror that their ruthless tactics are not working....The left like to have their own way and they will do it by fair or foul means. 

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...t/news-story/cd969941f903a0acd9c6a4bac80ba30a

*Lessons in way media lost plot
JULIAN TOMLINSON, Townsville Bulletin
November 17, 2016 12:45pm
Subscriber only

The anti-Trump and anti-Brexit camps are in disbelief that voters could be so dumb, so uneducated.

They’ve been branded racists, rednecks, sexists, misogynists, bigots and idiots, and their opponents have even called for them to die.

In both votes, the losing voters chucked the world’s biggest tantrums, rampaging through the streets, gnashing their teeth, burning flags, and wailing that anyone who voted against them actually voted for the end of the world.

It’s been some of the most childish and deeply concerning displays you could witness. The theme is always the same: anyone who voted for Brexit and Trump just didn’t bother to educate themselves.

This is grossly insulting and factually incorrect.

Trump’s policies barely got a look-in in mainstream media except to be held up as ludicrous, racist, backward and laughable.

Then idealistic – and possibly unethical, if not deceptive and biased – journos devoted hundreds of hours to attacking Trump personally while giving Hillary free kick after free kick.

Comments Trump made 11 years ago received top billing on international news bulletins, while Hillary received strident defence from most media outlets that either openly scoffed or stayed meekly silent in the face of damning evidence of corruption and suspect financial dealings.

At least one analysis out of America has laid the “blame” for Trump’s victory squarely at the feet of the media, and not only is it spot on, it sounds a stark warning to the Australian press as well.

A US analyst launched a withering tirade against journalists chasing Trump “click bait” instead of talking to the ordinary people he was reaching out to. It was abject and breathtaking arrogance from the US media, failing to pay heed to the rumblings of middle America and ignoring Trump’s wins in the Republican primaries.

They said he couldn’t possibly win the nomination, and then after he won that, they still couldn’t recognise that they actually had no idea what their readers and listeners were thinking.

Despite what many believe, media outlets do reserve the right to favour certain candidates, but some American journalists clearly breached their code of ethics by sending controversial stories to Hillary’s staff for approval before publishing.

All this was revealed not by diligent and inquisitive journalism but by WikiLeaks. And even then it received scant coverage.

Trump ran on a platform completely contrary to everything the Left (Labor and the Greens) holds dear and insists we all must believe or face eternal damnation. He will cancel billions of dollars of funding to climate change bodies, drastically tighten US border controls, slash tax rates and release the shackles on the fossil fuel industry.

Trump’s comments and conduct make it hard to believe people voted for the person, so they either liked Hillary less (which isn’t hard to believe), or they simply voted for his policies.

At worst, it’s a mixture of the two and it’s compelling evidence that after decades of failed left-wing predictions of human-caused Armageddon, people have had enough of being told how to live and how to think.

While Hillary received about 200,000 more votes, Trump earned more votes in states that mattered most. In a way, it’s like our preferential voting system, which has often denied victory to the candidate who earned the most primary votes.

Here in Australia, Pauline Hanson, the Australian Liberty Alliance and now Senator Cory Bernardi with his Australian Conservatives movement are making similar noises as Trump, and unsurprisingly, the media here is treating them and their growing base with the same disdain.

Journalists would do well to get out of their ivory castles, pay less attention to left-wing propaganda and actually speak to “normal” middle and working-class Australians.

Those Americans whom the media ignored had only one outlet to vent their frustration, the ballot box, and the same is happening in Australia and around the world.*


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2016)

wayneL said:


> I'm confused,  what's wrong with the app?
> 
> There are hundreds of useless apps with limited audience. Could she be right?




Good question. Presumably these apps are international. Is Apple worried about Red Indians (not not the Commos noco), following on and telling their stories of genocide and suppression to the American public ?


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good question. Presumably these apps are international. Is Apple worried about Red Indians (not not the Commos noco), following on and telling their stories of genocide and suppression to the American public ?




I think it's considered as an inferior presentation standard to their product. Kind of like a Rolls Royce with Holden rims.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think it's considered as an inferior presentation standard to their product. Kind of like a Rolls Royce with Holden rims.




Don't know, I haven't seen it, but no doubt a government grant will be available to lick it in to shape.


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't know, I haven't seen it, but no doubt a government grant will be available to lick it in to shape.




Well it's not "Survival Island 3".

"Digital Rangers" is going to be accepted by Apple afterall, so long as the technical aspects are addressed.


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2016)

There is a bloke on the ABC currently talking about cricket dressed like Ruth Cracknell's "Maggie Beare" character !!


hang about checking Google..


it's a bloke named  Catherine Malcolm Gerard McGregor and he's an army officer WTF!!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> There is a bloke on the ABC currently talking about cricket dressed like Ruth Cracknell's "Maggie Beare" character !!
> 
> 
> hang about checking Google..
> ...




Yes, he/she had the operation a while ago.

Did you ever watch Get Smart ? Brings to mind the Gertrude Gerald character in a show about the circus. 

Actually he/she seems pretty intelligent, and (s)he's a friend of Tony Abbott so (s)he can't be all bad.


----------



## dutchie (21 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> There is a bloke on the ABC currently talking about cricket dressed like Ruth Cracknell's "Maggie Beare" character !!
> 
> 
> hang about checking Google..
> ...






SirRumpole said:


> Yes, he/she had the operation a while ago.
> 
> Did you ever watch Get Smart ? Brings to mind the Gertrude Gerald character in a show about the circus.
> 
> Actually he/she seems pretty intelligent, and (s)he's a friend of Tony Abbott so (s)he can't be all bad.





Hey *guys*, this is the same _person_ that wanted to get rid of the word 'guys'.


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2016)

After watching the femmes in action last night, I'm starting to wonder if 18c will be the new weapon of choice to bludgeon males in the future.

These women used the court's ultimate decision in throwing out the action against the students as working proof, then declaring the regardless of the decision patent racism was in play WTF.

One big mouthed panelist managed to segue the Bill Leak cartoon from being (in her opinion) racist to being, in truth,  an attack on Aboriginal woman. The world is going mad again.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> After watching the femmes in action last night, I'm starting to wonder if 18c will be the new weapon of choice to bludgeon males in the future.
> 
> These women used the court's ultimate decision in throwing out the action against the students as working proof, then declaring the regardless of the decision patent racism was in play WTF.
> 
> One big mouthed panelist managed to segue the Bill Leak cartoon from being (in her opinion) racist to being, in truth,  an attack on Aboriginal woman. The world is going mad again.




Yes, I found myself agreeing with Abetz for once, that the process is the punishment. The operation of 18C seems to be inconsistent with the process of natural justice, ie if there is little to no prospect of conviction then the case should not go to court in the first place. 18C just seems a vehicle for harrassment by people with an axe to grind.

 IMHO people should not be dragged through the courts for offhand or otherwise inoffensive comments as Abetz alluded to, but he was shouted down by a couple of femmonazis with more emotion than reasoning which seems fairly typical of the whole 18C debate.


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I found myself agreeing with Abetz for once, that the process is the punishment. The operation of 18C seems to be inconsistent with the process of natural justice, ie if there is little to no prospect of conviction then the case should not go to court in the first place. 18C just seems a vehicle for harrassment by people with an axe to grind.
> 
> IMHO people should not be dragged through the courts for offhand or otherwise inoffensive comments as Abetz alluded to, but he was shouted down by a couple of femmonazis with more emotion than reasoning which seems fairly typical of the whole 18C debate.




"When we start demonising Aboriginal men, what we're also doing is demonising Aboriginal women."  

Halfwit taking centre stage on the National Broadcaster


----------



## Logique (22 November 2016)

To be fair, Pearson paid out on _The Quadrant_ too, for it's "..hard right prejudice". He's not particularly happy within anyone, bar Paul Keating. 

".._a spittoon's worth of perverse people willing the wretched to fail_." Ouch, they won't like that in Ultimo.



> *Noel Pearson lambasts 'racist' ABC at Paul Keating biography launch in Sydney*
> By Georgina Mitchell, SMH, 21 November 2016:  http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ography-launch-in-sydney-20161121-gsucm5.html
> 
> ..."[N]ot the least the country's miserable, racist national broadcaster: a spittoon's worth of perverse people willing the wretched to fail," Mr Pearson said midway through his speech.
> ...


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2016)

Logique said:


> To be fair, Pearson paid out on _The Quadrant_ too, for it's "..hard right prejudice". He's not particularly happy within anyone, bar Paul Keating.
> 
> ".._a spittoon's worth of perverse people willing the wretched to fail_." Ouch, they won't like that in Ultimo.




Of course it's the white fella that has to take his racism on the chin, even though only <5% of the world's population is white on the Luschan scale.


----------



## Logique (23 November 2016)

Great suggestion from JoNova, decentralize the ABC.  Although Bourke is probably not the ideal choice.



> Trump wakes Ad agencies: not everyone wants to be a politically correct coastal city yuppie - November 22nd, 2016 : http://joannenova.com.au/
> 
> ..A  lot of the ABC problems would be solved if we *booted them out of Ultimo in Sydney* and asked them to live in Bourke, Mildura, or Wagga… you name it. Indeed, how about Orange (where the Nationals just lost a seat they’ve held forever to the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party, a result that zero ABC commentators predicted...


----------



## Knobby22 (23 November 2016)

The ABC is more decentralised than the others. At least they have reporters in the bush.

It would be good to set up programs in the country though. 
Anyone seen Rosehaven filmed in Tassie? Funniest and best program on TV this year in my view. No smell of politics which adds to the pleasure.


----------



## noco (23 November 2016)

How low can this blatantly biased ABC get away with it.

Fran Kelly's vilification and abuse of Donald Trump is pretty obvious....She has definitely gone over board.. 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...e/news-story/ce53f401e5f198407b9841e71ad3d7ce


*The ABC is crazed with hatred for Donald Trump. In one astonishing item today for activist Fran Kelly's Radio National Breakfast show we're asked to believe that a meeting of fewer than 200 white racists represents Trump and  Trump has not repudiated them enough. 

One man at that meeting is beaten up and left bloodied by Leftist activists but he - and not the Leftist thugs - is still portrayed as the aggressor.

Far-Left MSNBC host Rachel Maddow is quoted attacking Trump as if she is the voice of the mainstream.

Trump is also attacked for postponing a meeting with the New York Times, his vehement critic, and is deplored for thinking Nigel Farage could be a good ambassador.

There is horror at Trump's suggestion that his son-in-law could help him bring Israel and the Palestinians together. No background is given to this suggestion: as in that Jared Kushner is a successful businessman, a key advisor in Trump's successful campaign and an Orthodox Jew.

Yesterday's roundup for Radio National Breakfast was also unremittingly hostile.

How much longer will it be before the ABC starts to report on Trump dispassionately - as if he were another President of the United States and not a Hitler in chrysalis form?

Right now this is not reporting but shrieking. And the ABC audience will be as misled about the Trump administration as it was about the Trump campaign.

UPDATE

Jon Faine is again venting on ABC Melbourne.






But Tony Thomas is particularly struck by Emma Alberici's effort:


ABC TV’s Emma Alberici wants us to believe that lice are twice as popular as US president-elect Donald Trump. In her 34-minute Foreign Correspondent special on Sunday night (20/11) she splices in (at 29mins) polling data showing 54% of respondent voters favored lice over Trump, while only 28% favored Trump over lice.

This doubtless had Alberici’s luvvie pals squirming with pleasure. It did nothing for the credibility of herself, Foreign Correspondent or the ABC. Nor did she see any inconsistency worth explaining between the lice “finding” and Trump getting 61 million votes in the election.

She provided no context for the lice poll, merely lifting the factoid in from a youtube clip. In fact, the poll involved 1222 respondents nationally last May, and generated a raft of other crazy memes like Trump being slightly more popular than haemorrhoids and cockroaches.

Needless to say, the pollsters never sought views on whether Hillary Clinton was more popular than lice, cockroaches or haemorrhoids, or whether Trump supporters hung up the phone rather than take any more anti-Trump insults. But it was good enough for Alberici as part of Foreign Correspondent’s juvenile stitch-up of Trump and his supporters.

There is more. Much more.*


----------



## wayneL (24 November 2016)

The bias is not unremitting and undisguised. "Without bias or agenda" an absolutely laughable mendacity.

They haven't learned there lesson, have they. Tim Minchen was on there yesterday spewing leftist outrage and indulging in peurile name-calling, to the delight of the nameless fool interviewing.

Yet, this is what lost them the election in the US. The more intolerance, intellectual vomit and name-calling they puke, the further they push the center to the right. 

Certainly the left has pushed me out of my resolutely centrist philosophy, closer to conservatism. They are teaching us (and not to mention the genuine right) to absolutely despise the left. Yep, out in the trenches folks, we're (ordinary middle of the road people) gettin angry and it's gonna get ugly, mark my words.


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2016)

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...the-national-broadcaster-20161125-gsxmqv.html



> In the case of the ABC news, if you want to watch a good news service, watch SBS news...


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...the-national-broadcaster-20161125-gsxmqv.html




Arrest the Governor General ?  Nice take on democracy there Paul. 

As for the 'hard luck stories' I completely agree. Much as I sympathise with Liz Jackson getting Parkinson's I really have no desire to watch 40 minutes of her struggling through her life, a lot of other people have the same or similar troubles, so why is she special ?

The ABC needs to be more mainstream imo, the economy, the standard of services, are consumers getting ripped off by government or business etc.

There is not enough education on the ABC, maybe because there are not sufficient high quality journalists left in the organisation.


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Arrest the Governor General ?  Nice take on democracy there Paul.
> 
> As for the 'hard luck stories' I completely agree. Much as I sympathise with* Liz Jackson getting Parkinson's* I really have no desire to watch 40 minutes of her struggling through her life, a lot of other people have the same or similar troubles, so why is she special ?
> 
> ...





LGBTxxx*P*


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> LGBTxxx*P*




Yep. too much of them too.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 November 2016)

I have some time for some left and lgtbi issues. However the ABC has taken advocacy to fascist levels.

gg


----------



## noco (25 November 2016)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have some time for some left and lgtbi issues. However the ABC has taken advocacy to fascist levels.
> 
> gg




Hey, good to see you back again...I for one have missed you.......Hope you are well.


----------



## Logique (27 November 2016)

They're wringing their hands in Ultimo tonight.



> *'The ABC is letting Australia down:  Paul Keating slams the national broadcaster*
> - 25 November 2016: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...the-national-broadcaster-20161125-gsxmqv.html


----------



## Logique (5 December 2016)

December/January - you're on your own say the pampered ABC presenters and their shows



> *Life is Good at Their ABC*
> By: Tony Thomas:  http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/12/life-good-abc/
> What can taxpayers expect for the billion dollars a year that underwrites the ABC?  Not much over the Christmas season, which begins when shows go on hiatus at some point in November and very often doesn't end until March, when rested leftists return to preach the goat-cheese gospel...


----------



## Tisme (6 December 2016)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have some time for some left and lgtbi issues. However the ABC has taken advocacy to fascist levels.
> 
> gg




Don't watch this Tink (and others who heed poor taste warnings):


----------



## sptrawler (20 December 2016)

Here is a bit of ABC social engineering.IMO

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...ed-with-political-class',-study-shows/8134508

A paragraph that annoys me is here:

_The ANU report also revealed strong support for Indigenous recognition in the constitution and same-sex marriage.

Almost three-quarters of voters voiced strong support for medically-assisted euthanasia and 69 per cent of respondents supported a woman's right to obtain an abortion.

"Australians' support for constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians and for marriage equality suggests that any public votes on these issues will succeed," ANU researcher Dr Jill Sheppard said.

"This should provide some relief to the Government amid the torrent of bad news in these results."

The report found strong support for Australia's border protection policies, with 56 per cent of respondents supporting offshore processing, although 40 per cent supported resettlement in Australia._

The article says there is strong support for Indigenous recognition in the constitution and same sex marriage. yet don't state percentages, when they obviously have them.

They can state numbers for euthanasia, womens right to abortion, offshore processing etc, strange they don't supply actual numbers for same sex marriage.


----------



## noco (16 February 2017)

There you go Tisme....Just ask an expert.

Not quite the same but it does embrace QandA.


----------



## Tisme (17 February 2017)

Had professional talking head Susan Carland on this morning's news show. I'm guessing we are being primed for another wave of pro Islamic propaganda on several fronts. e.g QANDA, Drum, Lateline.

What is it with the ABC and their propensity to doff their lids and tug the forelocks foreign cultures ? Isn't that the SBS' role?

The sport is always dominated by soccer and only small grabs of our own code, entire shows are given over to the Muslim curse that they would portray as some kind of civil shining light, when we all know they  are being pandered to incase they turn feral.

Similarly they won't land a glove on governing politicians for fear of retribution from the LNP, but happy to role their eyes at Hanson who is becoming a dominant player in politics.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Had professional talking head Susan Carland on this morning's news show. I'm guessing we are being primed for another wave of pro Islamic propaganda on several fronts. e.g QANDA, Drum, Lateline.
> 
> What is it with the ABC and their propensity to doff their lids and tug the forelocks foreign cultures ? Isn't that the SBS' role?
> 
> ...




You would expect that with an ex Murdoch mole in the top job they would be laying off the PC stuff, but yes the ABC is certainly tilting to the Right in the political sense. 

We have another LNP pollie on Insiders tomorrow, Fridenburg, following on from Sinodinos last week. It's time we had some more balance.

Insiders needs a fornat shakeup in my view, it's getting a bit stale. More interviews with a wider range of not just politicians, but other "insiders" from industry, professions and yes even unions.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2017)

Having Party shills like Nikki Savva on Insiders reduces the program's credibility.

Surely they can find someone less biased than her ?


----------



## dutchie (19 February 2017)

Amazing. Nikki Savva got through 60 minutes of Insiders without hysterical shrieking of "Abbott, Abbott, Abbott!".
Well done Nikki.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2017)

The ABC nearly hit the jackpot today with a story about aboriginal LGBxyz's. 

They may have been Muslims too for all I know.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2017)

Damn disgusting have a photo of gays in a story about sex.

And is the ABC trying to be the Daily Mirror or take the place of News of the World in the promiscuity department ?

What else can we expect from an ex Murdoch chief executive ? She should be shown the door.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...ur-mental-health-too-the-conversation/8322520


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Damn disgusting have a photo of gays in a story about sex.
> 
> And is the ABC trying to be the Daily Mirror or take the place of News of the World in the promiscuity department ?
> 
> ...





Involuntary reflex to throw up.


----------



## wayneL (4 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Damn disgusting have a photo of gays in a story about sex.
> 
> And is the ABC trying to be the Daily Mirror or take the place of News of the World in the promiscuity department ?
> 
> ...




Why..... just, why?


----------



## McLovin (4 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Damn disgusting have a photo of gays in a story about sex.
> 
> And is the ABC trying to be the Daily Mirror or take the place of News of the World in the promiscuity department ?
> 
> ...




That seems a bit much. I don't think there is even a need to show a hetero couple with their tongues down eachothers' throats.


----------



## explod (4 March 2017)

Bit of a change from showing down the front shirts of or around the almost bare backsides of women from our hard to let go days for male domination and satisfaction.  Gays are doing thier own thing without harm to anyone else.   And very different to the pedeaphilia of the Catholic Church brothers,  priests and saints so forth in considerable measure.


----------



## wayneL (5 March 2017)

explod said:


> Bit of a change from showing down the front shirts of or around the almost bare backsides of women from our hard to let go days for male domination and satisfaction.  Gays are doing thier own thing without harm to anyone else.   And very different to the pedeaphilia of the Catholic Church brothers,  priests and saints so forth in considerable measure.



I'm not sure I've ever seen the tongue of a Catholic priest down a child's throat in a news article about sex plod.

FFS mste, wake the #### up and stop apologising for these clowns with false dichotomies... or did it escape your attention that often that paedophilia was ofvthe gay variety? 

Look, I think it's a nice goal to promote gays as part of the spectrum of what humans are and end discrimination. 

But dammit I don't want to see them snogging in a generic sex article any more than seeing a hetro couple indulging in scat play (also part of spectrum if human sexuality buddy... and legal between consenting adults)


----------



## Tisme (5 March 2017)

explod said:


> Gays are doing thier own thing without harm to anyone else.




It obviously harmed a few of us here seeing that picture. I'm still trying to sear the image from my eyeballs with a red hot poker.

If you want a pet indulgence, get a box of plastic bags, buy a dog and walk it in the park. You get to see bum holes. handle s4it and get licked on the hands and face after they have finished with their tongue duties.


----------



## explod (5 March 2017)

Agree with you both that it was graphically a bit over the top.

As a new member in 1970 I witnessed a bloke (who had been loitering around some toilets) back at the Station being held down by two other young members and having a baton rammed into his anus by the Sergeant.   Never got over the incident or the  screams of this fellow.   I then did some study on gays,  spoke to Doctors and researchers. 

Being gay is a genetic imbalance and because of the feminine side being more prominent are in the main less aggressive by nature.   In late career as part of a program to target and reduce pedeaphile presence around Flinders Street Station I learned (we had clinical psycholgists in the team)  that pedeaphile became so from interaction when young from pedeaphiles.  There is no doubt (though not talked about) that the high incidence of this within the churches will be those who became pedeaphiles from their seniors.   The youngsters damaged were those who were never that way inclined (as you say WayneL,  there is some tendency insome) biologically.

However with what is on the media today anything is fair in my view and particularly if it causes the issues to be aired and discussed.   Then families have the knowledge to protect and inform thier children.  In the past children were beaten by thier Farther's when they tried to tell them what, for example,  a St John of God brother did to them.


----------



## explod (5 March 2017)

In restrospect I'm a bit out of context and off topic but had to express a very hard experience which your experiences reignited.  So apologies.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2017)

explod said:


> In restrospect I'm a bit out of context and off topic but had to express a very hard experience which your experiences reignited.  So apologies.




No need to apologise plod, your on the ground experiences are worth more than most of us who only go by what we see on the news.

I agree with McLovin on the matter of the photo. No need for explicit stuff either gay or hetero.


----------



## Tink (6 March 2017)

You must have missed the gay couple on the ABC in 2010 that were interviewed and wanted to be accepted.
Promoting gay marriage.

In 2010 Ginger Gorman interviewed a gay couple about their struggle to become parents.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-10/gorman-second-thoughts/4809582

http://www.mamamia.com.au/the-coupl...for-the-sole-purpose-of-sexually-abusing-him/


----------



## Tisme (6 March 2017)

Tink said:


> You must have missed the gay couple on the ABC in 2010 that were interviewed and wanted to be accepted.
> Promoting gay marriage.
> 
> In 2010 Ginger Gorman interviewed a gay couple about their struggle to become parents.
> ...




I don't understand why people are so intent on being so naive.

Used to be, parents would never leave a child unsupervised while in the company of a male. Why? Well they knew wierdos walked amongst us and outward appearance was no badge of honour.

What is the distance of moral decay between a normal person and those with abnormal sexual behaviours and how close are those abnormals to each other?  My bet is that if you took the age restriction off there would be an explosion of child abuse by hebephiles and the like , which of course wouldn't be classified as abuse at that point.

This is one of the comments in your link Tink:

"_This story made me physically ill. Then after reading comments about judge's leniency in australia towards child abuse got me thinking of my ex partner who was "adopted" at age 15 by a well known "CLOSET" gay perth lawyer and sent to a posh boys school to recruit young boys to attend parties where they were plied with as much food alcohol and drugs and then slowly moulded for sexual favours. I remember my partner telling me that top lawyers barristers and many judges were invited to participate and my ex was often sodomised on a daily basis by these monsters who would turn up in their posh fancy cars. So I agree perhaps someone does need to take a look at the reasons behind the leniency in child abuse sentencing!!"_


----------



## Tisme (6 March 2017)

When six aberrants (even the host is one of them) meet one lone voice and even the audience is stacked against the one. Biased and social engineering much?


http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4254204.htm


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2017)

Well hopefully, the ABC can get back to its roots, and be a media that reports news and information.
Rather than a political opinion, irrespective of who is in office, that would be good. IMO
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-07/michelle-guthrie-unveils-abc-restructure-plan/8330878
In todays ABC, the following.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...ter-corp,-labor-claims-in-wa-election/8332276
When you read the article, Barnett says there is no intention to privatise the water authority, so why not have a headline of "Labor making wild allegations again"?


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2017)

ABC is running an all woman's day. Not sure if we are supposed to ooh and ah at how clever they are doing what men can also do, but being a talking head in the media is hardly rocket science.

The news readers are hard at promoting a program featuring an overly animated Susan Carland who seems hell bent on presenting herself as the happiest women in the world (because of her conversion to Islam?)


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> ABC is running an all woman's day.




PC tokenism. Rubbish.


----------



## Logique (8 March 2017)

If any demographic segment needs a special day of their own, it's our young men, who are falling behind at school and taking their own lives at record rates.


----------



## explod (8 March 2017)

Logique said:


> If any demographic segment needs a special day of their own, it's our young men, who are falling behind at school and taking their own lives at record rates.



Absolutely spot on,  I'm all for feminism,  my Daughter is high up in a Govt. Dept.,  but in our historical genes,  men went out to hunt and the ladies swept the cave. 

The subject needs focused attention


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2017)

The ABC must have been taken over by feminazis. News 24 is going through so much cr@p about "unconscious bias" against women it's sickening. 

It's been going on all week. 

They should just pull their bras up and report things that are relevant to all of us.


----------



## noco (11 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC must have been taken over by feminazis. News 24 is going through so much cr@p about "unconscious bias" against women it's sickening.
> 
> It's been going on all week.
> 
> They should just pull their bras up and report things that are relevant to all of us.




Rumpy, at last you have seen through the ABC for what it really is......So blatantly biased and the reason is it is loaded with Greenies and the Socialist left........A good strong leader should pull the ABC into line but our weak Prime Minister is afraid of further back lash  if he dares tries it.......He is frightened  of being crucified.


----------



## Tisme (11 March 2017)

noco said:


> Rumpy, at last you have seen through the ABC for what it really is......So blatantly biased and the reason is it is loaded with Greenies and the Socialist left........A good strong leader should pull the ABC into line but our weak Prime Minister is afraid of further back lash  if he dares tries it.......He is frightened  of being crucified.





You done your homework on the women who runs the show?


----------



## SirRumpole (13 March 2017)

Good on Paul Barry on Media Watch having a go at the lack of coverage of the problems at Punchbowl school. 

It wasn't just the ABC that wimped out, the SMH and commie TV went down the PC route.

Shame.


----------



## sptrawler (14 March 2017)

I read the ABC is axing the "Dr Blake Mysteries", probably to put on another loaded Q & A show, to further the political aspiration of some employee.
The only ABC show my other half watches, now they are going to finish it. 
To add more tales of woe, Tivo is shutting down in October, why? because it works too well, what is wrong with the World, why do they have to cause my missus to shout so much?
Don't these people realise the angst they are causing me, my ears are ringing all the time,


----------



## bellenuit (14 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> To add more tales of woe, Tivo is shutting down in October




What do you mean? Manufacture of their set top boxes or some service they offer in Australia? It was only last year TiVo was bought out by Rovi (previously known as Macrovision) and the combined entity retained the name TiVo as the combined company name, due to its brand recognition. TiVo had a fairly good 4Q16 report a few months back.


----------



## sptrawler (14 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> What do you mean? Manufacture of their set top boxes or some service they offer in Australia? It was only last year TiVo was bought out by Rovi (previously known as Macrovision) and the combined entity retained the name TiVo as the combined company name, due to its brand recognition. TiVo had a fairly good 4Q16 report a few months back.



Well I received an email, informing me the TIVO electronic programme transmission, a bit like the t.v week, won't be transmitted after October the 31st.
I'm really pizzed, we have had the Tivo for about 10 years and it has been great.
The wife can get season passes to any show, any actor, any sporting event, it is idiot proof recording that's why I bought it.
Now I have to go back to the screaming and ranting, about the inputting of data to a PVR, why in gods name doesn't Telstra or someone take over the EPG duties even if they charged for it.
The benefits of keeping the Tivo, I would pay for.
Anyway enough of my rant, here is a part of the email.

 After almost a decade of service, we are sad to report that we have
reached the end of our TiVo license and the TiVo Service is coming to
an end in Australia on 31 October 2017.

The TiVo Service is what delivers electronic programming guide data to
your TiVo device each day, so without it, there will be no electronic
programming guide and TiVo recording features such as Season Pass and
WishList will stop working. For more information on what will and will
not work after 31 October see â€œWhat does this mean for you and your
TiVo after 31 October?â€�

What the hell is happening to Australia, we are being funnelled down a tube, where you will pay for everything that is currently free.

Oh sorry everyone, obviously a bit off topic, actually a lot off topic.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2017)

The ultimate irony on ABC News24 today. Two women discussing male suicide. It seems men don't exist any more in the minds of some.


----------



## bellenuit (22 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ultimate irony on ABC News24 today. Two women discussing male suicide. It seems men don't exist any more in the minds of some.




Well they would know what drives them to it!


----------



## Tisme (23 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ultimate irony on ABC News24 today. Two women discussing male suicide. It seems men don't exist any more in the minds of some.




You really want more like the new Weatherboy? He might be eye candy for the gay brotherhood, but very off putting for red blooded au naturel males.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> You really want more like the new Weatherboy? He might be eye candy for the gay brotherhood, but very off putting for red blooded au naturel males.




Yes, Vanessa O'Hanlon's departure was a sad day for me. But at least the weatherboy has some qualifications for what he is doing. Just avert your eyes and think of Vanessa


----------



## Tisme (23 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, Vanessa O'Hanlon's departure was a sad day for me. But at least the weatherboy has some qualifications for what he is doing. Just avert your eyes and think of Vanessa




LOL Reminds me of the quip to prolong the deed,.... think of Maggie Thatcher


----------



## noco (3 April 2017)

The ABC should be condemned.

https://www.votocrat.com/susane.lis...-mind-control”-malcolm-roberts-agree-disagree


----------



## Boggo (3 April 2017)

noco said:


> The ABC should be condemned.




I find that this site is more accurate than the ABC 

http://www.xyz.net.au/


----------



## SirRumpole (3 April 2017)

noco said:


> The ABC should be condemned.
> 
> https://www.votocrat.com/susane.lisa/poll-abc-uses-“nazi-style-mind-control”-malcolm-roberts-agree-disagree




The ABC has it's faults but it's streets ahead in reliability over your Right Wing rubbish.


----------



## noco (3 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC has it's faults but it's streets ahead in reliability over your Right Wing rubbish.




Rubbish hey Rumpy??????????...Now you are getting desperate in your old age.......You know as well I do as do the majority of sensible clear thinking people, the ABC is loaded with Greenies and socialist left....What else would you expect......Control the media (Fabian ideology) and you control the naive....The naive who cannot think for themselves and swallow the socialist controlled propaganda.


----------



## noco (4 April 2017)

The ABC are at it again......The Green/Labor left wing socialists dominated ABC have used Four Corners in an endeavor to discredit Pauline Hanson and One Nation as dictatorial........

Perhaps they should do one on the Labor Party, not bloody likely of course.....Step out of line in the Labor Party and you are kicked out.....But oh no that is not dictatorial.....Like hell it isn't. 

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...a/news-story/7716c48c7056296899be021ff0d00e14


----------



## boofhead (4 April 2017)

Pauline seems to behaving a little like Clive.

ABC have done stories about Obeid, the Rudd, Gillard, Rudd shenanigans etc. It seems your bias is clouding you.


----------



## Jorgensen (4 April 2017)

One thing that one did notice about One Nation is the senior age of the members.Maybe a inaccurate  view,but it does concur with other research done on One Nation.
Perhaps people that long for yesterday?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 April 2017)

Jorgensen said:


> One thing that one did notice about One Nation is the senior age of the members.Maybe a inaccurate  view,but it does concur with other research done on One Nation.
> Perhaps people that long for yesterday?




Yes I think the White Australia Policy is still alive in the eyes of some older people, one of whom resides here.

While I agree that we have enough people in this country already and we don't need any more, Hanson goes about it the wrong way by singling out specific groups like first Asians and now Muslims. Interesting the way she switched from one to the other. Asians especially Chinese buying up properties was probably the fear factor when she first started, now she is starting the terrorism dog whistle. Very clever, but ultimately she is so unsophisticated that only but a very small minority would think for long that she is anything but a cheap populist.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

boofhead said:


> Pauline seems to behaving a little like Clive.
> 
> ABC have done stories about Obeid, the Rudd, Gillard, Rudd shenanigans etc. It seems your bias is clouding you.




Have they done a 4 part serial spoof  "At Home with Malcolm" yet ... like they did on Gillard?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Have they done a 4 part serial spoof  "At Home with Malcolm" yet ... like they did on Gillard?




Not to mention "The Killing Season" .


----------



## basilio (4 April 2017)

Clearly haven't  been out enough have I ? I decided to have a look at Noco's votocrat site just for educational purposes.

First observation was realising that we have a Member of Parliament , Malcolm Roberts, who can say with a straight face that the ABC uses "Nazi like mind control".  That is so special.He is truly out there with the spacemen and not a hint of psychedelic drugs as an excuse.
Then there is this execrable website which takes such a mad comment and turns it into a poll.
What trumped it all  however was the furious support of the commentators who almost (almost) made Noco seem rational.


----------



## noco (4 April 2017)

basilio said:


> Clearly haven't  been out enough have I ? I decided to have a look at Noco's votocrat site just for educational purposes.
> 
> First observation was realising that we have a Member of Parliament , Malcolm Roberts, who can say with a straight face that the ABC uses "Nazi like mind control".  That is so special.He is truly out there with the spacemen and not a hint of psychedelic drugs as an excuse.
> Then there is this execrable website which takes such a mad comment and turns it into a poll.
> What trumped it all  however was the furious support of the commentators who almost (almost) made Noco seem rational.




Character assassination again...You just don't know any other grubby way do you? Well, here is real character assassination by the grubby left wing socialist ABC doing a hatchet job on Pauline Hanson....I wondered how  long it would take......I thought Bill Shorten's love of his life GETUP  would have been in the act long before the ABC.....Ah yes Bill, as Richo once stated "WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN".......The secret telephone tapes presented by the grubby ABC was in fact illegal.....Now listen to Andrew Bolt your most hated commentator give some home truths about real character assassination from the ABC.....It leaves you like babe in arms.


----------



## noco (8 April 2017)

The ABC were very selective, interviewing ex One Nation members who had an axe to grind but never presented the interview of *"I've since shown that it *did not show a second of film it shot over two days of her candidate Tshung Chang*, a Malaysian-born ratings analyst who is a contradiction of the image Four* *Corner clearly wanted to give*".......The ABC when asked, said they did not have enough footage to include this man.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...s/news-story/495f8320a9d174e48309e1c31c7dbbe0


----------



## dutchie (26 April 2017)

Peter Dutton calls for ABC to apologise over Manus Island incident

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t/news-story/5850b4039e4860c8fadd074729ef69a7


Immigration minister Peter Dutton has stood by his department’s version of events surrounding a child entering Manus Island during Easter and called for the ABC and Fairfax to apologise “in the next 24 hours” for suggesting the information he provided was false.

The minister last week said PNG defence personnel may have opened fire because three asylum seekers were spotted leading a five-year-old boy towards the immigration centre. The claims have been contradicted by the PNG defence force, Manus province police commander David Yapu and a former Manus Island MP, Ronny Knight.

Mr Dutton told Sky News tonight he had reconfirmed his original story with sources on the ground at Manus Island today and told the program he would not budge on those version of events.

@PeterDutton_MP says the ABC has 'lost the plot and they should apologise'... I stand by my comments. MORE http://bit.ly/2pboQBe 
 8:12 PM - 24 Apr 2017



1. There is no chance of the ABC apologising.
2. The ABC has not lost the plot, rubbishing the LNP *is* the plot.
3. Dutton should know 1. and 2. - so what is he going to do about it (the ABC)????


----------



## dutchie (26 April 2017)

Yassmin Abdel-Magied: ABC activist’s vile anti-Diggers remark slammed as ‘deeply reprehensible'

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...e/news-story/a8707ae6efecff24806637eec5fc41a6


THE spineless ABC is refusing to sack or even condemn a star broadcaster and PC poster girl who claimed Anzac Day should be spent thinking about Manus Island detainees, not Diggers.

Presenter Yassmin Abdel-Magied, who labels herself “first and foremost … Muslim”, caused outrage after hijacking the sacred “Lest We Forget” tribute in a sickening insult to the nation’s war dead.

As soldiers marched across the nation, the Sudan-born Australia Wide presenter posted on Facebook: “Lest. We. Forget. (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)”

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton slammed the activist as “a disgrace” while federal MP George Christensen demanded the ABC sack her.

“It is a disgrace that on our most significant national day ... this advocate seeks to make political mileage,” Mr Dutton said.

However, the ABC has stood behind Ms Abdel-Magied, who has previously caused controversy after declaring Islam was the “most feminist religion”.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 April 2017)

dutchie said:


> Peter Dutton calls for ABC to apologise over Manus Island incident
> 
> 
> 1. There is no chance of the ABC apologising.
> ...




All this guff about apologies is secondary to the main point of the story

WHAT IS THE TRUTH ?

It's a he says they say situation. 

And of course politicians never lie do they ?

Children overboard ?


----------



## SirRumpole (26 April 2017)

dutchie said:


> However, the ABC has stood behind Ms Abdel-Magied, who has previously caused controversy after declaring Islam was the “most feminist religion”.




The ABC should get rid of her. She obviously has no respect for our traditions.


----------



## Tisme (26 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC should get rid of her. She obviously has no respect for our traditions.




Well if you deliberately stack the ABC with anything but the persecuted heterosexual Anglo male, there has to be a point where affirmative action actually becomes the conduit of hate towards the heterosexual Anglo male.


----------



## noco (26 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC should get rid of her. She obviously has no respect for our traditions.




Thanks to Julia Gillard for stacking the ABC with 41 % Greenies and 32% left wing Labor stooges.......They are sympathizers of the Muslim warfare gang.


----------



## dutchie (26 April 2017)

Yassmin is just stupid but the ABC should know better.

The ABC scoffs contemptuously at the opinion of most Australians (again).


----------



## Tisme (26 April 2017)

Petition to fire Yassmin:

https://www.change.org/p/abc-to-fir...ign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-no_src-no_msg


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2017)

I guess she is fortunate, that she is honing her journalistic skills in Australia, rather than a Muslim country.

If you say the wrong thing there, they aren't very forgiving.


----------



## Tisme (1 May 2017)

Petition to save Yassmin's job:

https://www.change.org/p/ms-michell...publish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Petition to save Yassmin's job:
> 
> https://www.change.org/p/ms-michell...publish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg




If it was an election,  it would be a route, a landslide in favour of sacking her.


----------



## dutchie (25 May 2017)

Finally the ABC listens to the people.

ABC axes 'disrespectful' Muslims' show.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4536558/Yassmin-Abdel-Magied-ABC-TV-axed.html


----------



## overhang (25 May 2017)

The vile right suggesting the ABC should have been bombed instead of Manchester.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-24/abc-boss-seeks-quadrant-apology-over-vicious-attack/8554192


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2017)

dutchie said:


> Finally the ABC listens to the people.
> 
> ABC axes 'disrespectful' Muslims' show.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4536558/Yassmin-Abdel-Magied-ABC-TV-axed.html




Refreshing from the "most feminist" broadcaster in the nation.


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2017)

overhang said:


> The vile right suggesting the ABC should have been bombed instead of Manchester.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-24/abc-boss-seeks-quadrant-apology-over-vicious-attack/8554192




I think that's a Federal offence? He obviously has truck with QANDA and the nonsense that it is a leftist program that doesn't let the loony right in.


----------



## McLovin (25 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think that's a Federal offence? He obviously has truck with QANDA and the nonsense that it is a leftist program that doesn't let the loony right in.




I don't get the obsession conservatives have with Q and A. It's one hour a week, not particularly interesting and watched by less than 2% of the population – it rarely makes the top 20 shows of the night, although Four Corners, and even Media Watch do. If it's an attempt at indoctrination they'll have to lift their ratings somewhat. 

I see the village idiot was on 2GB this morning with Ray Hadley having a whinge about it, again. The country is in such great shape that the punters want a federal minister wasting breath opining about a talk show. Totes awesome.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 May 2017)

McLovin said:


> I see the village idiot was on 2GB this morning with Ray Hadley having a whinge about it, again.




Which member of the LNP are you referring to ? It's such a wide field.


----------



## PZ99 (25 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Which member of the LNP are you referring to ? It's such a wide field.



Peter Dutton I suspect.


----------



## McLovin (25 May 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Peter Dutton I suspect.



Yes, Dutton. I'm pretty sure the Peter Principle was coined to describe him when he rose to senior constable.


----------



## noco (26 May 2017)

dutchie said:


> Finally the ABC listens to the people.
> 
> ABC axes 'disrespectful' Muslims' show.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4536558/Yassmin-Abdel-Magied-ABC-TV-axed.html




https://www.votocrat.com/susane.lis...magied-a-terrorist-sympathiser-agree-disagree


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 May 2017)

I loathe the political aspect of the ABC.

Then again my grandchildren devour Peppa and the rest on Children's TV.

Many ABC programs are good, gardening, rural,  without that silly lady with a top exposing her neck and ears purporting to be a member of a world wide religion which disavows females exposing their necks and ears.  e.g

It is the leftist green city based programs that get up the nose.

The new management is slowly castrating those, so I feel no need to interfere or advocate change. One can have only one or two bulls in a herd, and the ABC have had over one hundred. 

Let nature take it's course. 

gg


----------



## dutchie (6 June 2017)

ABC is selling Australians down the river.

A Bangladeshi-born psychiatrist says the ABC plays a role in radicalising young Muslim teenagers by over emphasising how they are victims of discrimination.

See my post under: Islam: Is it inherently Evil?


----------



## Tisme (6 June 2017)

dutchie said:


> ABC is selling Australians down the river.
> 
> A Bangladeshi-born psychiatrist says the ABC plays a role in radicalising young Muslim teenagers by over emphasising how they are victims of discrimination.
> 
> See my post under: Islam: Is it inherently Evil?




Not just Muslims, but every other peculiar lifestyle choices. Give anyone an audience and they will play the role they perceive will give them fame, empathy and influence.


----------



## Tisme (10 July 2017)

Chris Uhlmann's piece for Insiders has certainly caused a giant twitter crush  in the USA

Went viral

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2016/s4698927.htm


----------



## SirRumpole (10 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> Chris Uhlmann's piece for Insiders has certainly caused a giant twitter crush  in the USA
> 
> Went viral
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2016/s4698927.htm




Good piece by Uhlmann. Do the Americans care what we think ?  Having their President being dominated by Putin does not appear to make them 'great'.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Good piece by Uhlmann. Do the Americans care what we think ?  Having their President being dominated by Putin does not appear to make them 'great'.




Well I must admit I did my bit using my Twitter avatar to enrage the locals who thought Australia was an upstart nation, with no right to critique Trump. It was a joyous experience and one I will remember warmly


----------



## SirRumpole (11 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> Well I must admit I did my bit using my Twitter avatar to enrage the locals who thought Australia was an upstart nation, with no right to critique Trump. It was a joyous experience and one I will remember warmly




When you get a response from the Donald, you will know you have made your mark.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> When you get a response from the Donald, you will know you have made your mark.




Virginia won't talk to me anymore LOL.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 July 2017)

How many more bungled cases yet to be discovered ? Just as well we have an independent media in the ABC.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-...ctoria-police-dna-bungle-embarrassing/8703978


----------



## drsmith (15 July 2017)

Donald Trump features very highly on the ABC, perhaps to the point of obsession,


> Donald Trump: From Macron to Trudeau, relive the US President's handshakes




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-15/donald-trump-emmanuel-macron-history-of-handshakes/8711314


----------



## Tisme (15 July 2017)

Julie Baird of the Drum stands up for one of her female cohorts (Males are never ostracized in Australia, unless the victim of Clementine Ford;who would have you killed by proxy):

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/yassm...-the-spit-of-public-life-20170714-gxb6qh.html


----------



## Tink (26 July 2017)

Why the ABC is at odds with us.

The ABC has not admitted to a lack of political diversity in its staff profile or systemic political bias in its programming. Yet the largest survey in 20 years of political attitudes among journalists found that 73.6 per cent of ABC journalists support Labor or the Greens. The Sunshine Coast University research also found that 41.2 per cent of ABC staff surveyed voted for the Greens. As Chris Kenny wrote in The Weekend Australian, the “federal vote ceiling” for the Greens is just over 10 per cent. On those figures, the ABC’s staff profile is highly unrepresentative of the Australian general public.

www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/jennifer-oriel/diversity-of-thought-practically-whitewashed-by-pc-ideology/news-story/9d16179ec45fe24f6b05072f64540ec7

------------------------------------------------------------

_There is absolutely no reason in this day and age, we (the taxpayer) need a greens left publicly funded media company.

What does the CBA, Medibank Private, Qantas, a host of former state banks, have in common.

Yes, the Government (taxpayer) got out of these respective businesses because they no longer needed to be in the insurance, airlines or banking industry.

The ABC is a relic of a previous age; a bloated public servant organisation, which without public funds would never survive in its current form._


----------



## SirRumpole (26 July 2017)

> _The ABC is a relic of a previous age; a bloated public servant organisation, which without public funds would never survive in its current form._




I would rather have a quality publicly funded ABC than Murdoch's trash.


----------



## Tisme (26 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I would rather have a quality publicly funded ABC than Murdoch's trash.




I do think it needs to stop being a lead vehicle for a perversion of equal opportunity for fringe dwellers.

How much longer do we have to watch people paraded into the spotlight like sideshow attractions so we can witness and wonder at them doing things normal people do, despite their disabilities:- being female, being coloured, being Muslim, being homosexual, etc. On one hand they have the impudence to tout we are all the same, then make sure the rest of us aren't represented in favour of the fringe; we are supposed to feel shame at our indignation.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> I do think it needs to stop being a lead vehicle for a perversion of equal opportunity for fringe dwellers.




Agreed, there are all sorts of 'repressed' minorities getting a go at the ABC these days, we'll probably see someone wearing a hijab reading the news soon, but as long as they keep their journalistic standards high they will providing a better service than the opposition.


----------



## Tink (27 July 2017)

The ABC is accused of waging war against Christians, with a report on domestic violence now under scrutiny.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4707054.htm


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

Tink said:


> The ABC is accused of waging war against Christians, with a report on domestic violence now under scrutiny.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4707054.htm




And criticisms of the ABC report were aired on...the ABC.

I doubt if Bolt or other Murdoch outlets would do an investigation into their own reporting.


----------



## Tink (27 July 2017)

Only because of the public backlash.

They are taxpayer funded.

Like any over bloated public service.


----------



## PZ99 (27 July 2017)

LOL. Murdoch is taxpayer funded as well... more money for less honesty 

http://www.smh.com.au/business/rupe...siness-virtually-taxfree-20150405-1meu0l.html

For every dollar you pay the ABC you pay twice that to the Murdoch empire to pollute the airwaves with myopically right wing homophobic conservative garbage.
It's a lemon and I want my money back.


----------



## Tisme (27 July 2017)

PZ99 said:


> LOL. Murdoch is taxpayer funded as well... more money for less honesty
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/rupe...siness-virtually-taxfree-20150405-1meu0l.html
> 
> ...





Didn't he get a mysterious $25m from the govt that nobody wants to talk about?


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> Didn't he get a mysterious $25m from the govt that nobody wants to talk about?




Yeah, he's really hard up for cash isn't he ?


----------



## PZ99 (27 July 2017)

Well that's news to me but hardly surprising. It's an evil empire of Tory philosophy that dominates the political media spectrum in multiple countries including here.

Not the sort of thing I want my taxes supporting. The ABC is better value - no matter how political it is.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Well that's news to me but hardly surprising. It's an evil empire of Tory philosophy that dominates the political media spectrum in multiple countries including here.
> 
> Not the sort of thing I want my taxes supporting. The ABC is better value - no matter how political it is.




Actually it seems to be $30 million.

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/melbour...illion-from-government-&-no-paperwork/8723468


----------



## PZ99 (27 July 2017)

Cheers, I do remember that one now.

I think the biggest problem for the ABC isn't the content, it's the duplicitous makeup of its radio network. A few years ago there was a radio survey for country Victoria. To put it briefly, they have 5 ABC stations for every 2 commercial services. Parliament newsradio scores precisely zip in most of those areas and the ABC RN network has little more. No one listens to it. So these networks should be consolidated. The vacated channels could then be leased out.

The radio spectrum is an inexhaustible resource that generates millions per year of revenue.
In a country as vast as Australia it's a no brainer for the Govt that maximising this resource should have higher priority over complaining about on air content.

In my view


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Cheers, I do remember that one now.
> 
> I think the biggest problem for the ABC isn't the content, it's the duplicitous makeup of its radio network. A few years ago there was a radio survey for country Victoria. To put it briefly, they have 5 ABC stations for every 2 commercial services. Parliament newsradio scores precisely zip in most of those areas and the ABC RN network has little more. No one listens to it. So these networks should be consolidated. The vacated channels could then be leased out.
> 
> ...




Country radio, ABC or commercial is abysmal. Bogans at one end , flower shows at the other. Maybe the reason no one listens is the content.

I live in a regional area and its ABC Classic FM for me, the most sensible station I can find.


----------



## Tisme (28 July 2017)

No sooner than Donald Trump bans chemical benders from the US armed forces, than the ABC pushes back by wheeling out resident chemical drag queen "Catherine" McGregor to give his thoughts about the issue under the guise of cricket talk.


----------



## Tisme (29 July 2017)

A bit of ABC humour:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-...x-australians-who-shaped-this-country/8751440


----------



## SirRumpole (29 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> A bit of ABC humour:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-...x-australians-who-shaped-this-country/8751440




Where's Bradman ?


----------



## Logique (30 July 2017)

Tink said:


> Why the ABC is at odds with us.
> The ABC has not admitted to a lack of political diversity in its staff profile or systemic political bias in its programming. Yet the largest survey in 20 years of political attitudes among journalists found that 73.6 per cent of ABC journalists support Labor or the Greens. The Sunshine Coast University research also found that 41.2 per cent of ABC staff surveyed voted for the Greens. As Chris Kenny wrote in The Weekend Australian, the “federal vote ceiling” for the Greens is just over 10 per cent. On those figures, the ABC’s staff profile is highly unrepresentative of the Australian general public.
> www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/jennifer-oriel/diversity-of-thought-practically-whitewashed-by-pc-ideology/news-story/9d16179ec45fe24f6b05072f64540ec7
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ...



Decentralize the ABC HQ to Bathurst. Then we'll see how representative their views are. They'll have to take their flakey views to the supermarket, the library and the pub.

Ultimo ABC, a sheltered workshop for the Left.  Tony Jones is on best advice, paid $450k.  To be balanced.  Such a good investment for the taxpayer!

Who is this well-heeled chardonnay socialist to tell me it's immoral to support cheap coal-fired electricity?

Does the elitist Jones have solar panels? I'm betting he does! Too bad for the ordinary mums and dads who couldn't afford solar panels. They are by Jones-definition, immoral!


----------



## Tisme (7 August 2017)

Today must a female day on ABC breakfast. Virginia must have uttered "female" a few hundred times already.... when her own son loses out to gender when trying for a job I wonder how she will react when those hens home to roost. Must have been to a party where a real man upset her applecart.

the catchphrase is "2017". Apparently 2017 is a magic pudding day when women become entitled to hold positions they aren't the best candidate for, when homosexual lifestylers become entitled to eliminate the last bastion of hetrosexual evil, etc. Yep 2017 is where it's at.

Virginia and her feminised male co-host even went so far as to wax lyrical that anyone with a different opinion to the ABC's social agenda is a troll by definition.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Today must a female day on ABC breakfast. Virginia must have uttered "female" a few hundred times already.... when her own son loses out to gender when trying for a job I wonder how she will react when those hens home to roost. Must have been to a party where a real man upset her applecart.
> 
> the catchphrase is "2017". Apparently 2017 is a magic pudding day when women become entitled to hold positions they aren't the best candidate for, when homosexual lifestylers become entitled to eliminate the last bastion of hetrosexual evil, etc. Yep 2017 is where it's at.
> 
> Virginia and her feminised male co-host even went so far as to wax lyrical that anyone with a different opinion to the ABC's social agenda is a troll by definition.




They had another whinging group of feminazis demanding 50% of jobs in the film industry go to women. Quota regardless of merit. That's one reason why the country continues to go down hill.


----------



## Tisme (7 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> They had another whinging group of feminazis demanding 50% of jobs in the film industry go to women. Quota regardless of merit. That's one reason why the country continues to go down hill.




Big time problem. Shame the same equity formula isn't used to drive workplace reform, with straight men given the 53% bias in say teaching, university courses, ABC employment, etc.

Virginia just ambused Betty Cuthbert's career as being a female agenda victory. She just doesn't understand the insult to Betty and everyone else who supported her.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

ABC radio and tv presenters are fuming at not getting their way, in the wake of yesterday's Cabinet meeting featuring same sex marriage.

Emma Alberici's so-called interview of Mathias Cormann was little more than a grand inquisition. A pre-prepared tirade, Cormann never allowed any continuity of response. Emma was literally seething.  Leigh Sales on 7:30 was no more balanced.

That's the balanced reporting we get for their $400,000pa taxpayer-funded salaries.

The Turnbull government says, we want to give everyday Australians a say. The ABC, the national broadcaster, is campaigning _against_ this. Credibility in tatters.


----------



## Tisme (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> ABC radio and tv presenters are fuming at not getting their way, in the wake of yesterday's Cabinet meeting featuring same sex marriage.
> 
> Emma Alberici's so-called interview of Mathias Cormann was little more than a grand inquisition. A pre-prepared tirade, Cormann never allowed any continuity of response. Emma was literally seething.  Leigh Sales on 7:30 was no more balanced.
> 
> ...




It's a problem when the only good news source is the ABC, but run like a matrilineal family tree.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

ABC Breakfast already ramping up its bias in favour of SSM on facebook and twitter.

Supposed to be neutral, not the social conscience of the few


----------



## SirRumpole (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> ABC Breakfast already ramping up its bias in favour of SSM on facebook and twitter.
> 
> Supposed to be neutral, not the social conscience of the few




Yes, and Leigh Sales was going for it a few nights back.

The ABC has become a social campaigner not a reporter of events.

I'd have to say though that Virginia did a pretty good job this morning with Lyle Shelton and an Irish SSM campaigner, giving them both a good chance to explain themselves.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, and Leigh Sales was going for it a few nights back.
> 
> The ABC has become a social campaigner not a reporter of events.
> 
> I'd have to say though that Virginia did a pretty good job this morning with Lyle Shelton and an Irish SSM campaigner, giving them both a good chance to explain themselves.





I'm reporting her to the ABC everytime she shows her bias. If everyone did that we might get some even handed commentary more often.


----------



## Tisme (11 August 2017)




----------



## Logique (11 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> ABC Breakfast already ramping up its bias in favour of SSM on facebook and twitter.
> Supposed to be neutral, not the social conscience of the few



Staff were pulled into gear by the ABC bosses this week apparently, ".._ABC does not have a position on this issue_.." or similar.  Yeah right.


----------



## qldfrog (11 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> If everyone did that we might get some even handed commentary more often.



Ahhh Tisme, still a dreamer ;-)


----------



## Tisme (12 August 2017)

Michael Rowlands was quick to post this on twitter and facebook with the tag:

"And it looked liked such a lovely postcard.. Guess the campaign is well and truly underway. #ssm #auspol @BreakfastNews "

Obviously from a left handed female, I think this a staged postcard to solicit a sympathy vote for the gays while protesting those dammed straight people. ABC sinicure all over it:


----------



## wayneL (13 August 2017)

Auntie had abandoned any illusion of impartial journalism, the bias is now more than palpable,  it just walks straight up and smacks you in the face.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2017)

ABC Breakfast had the gay lobby on again today, Magda Zubanski and some other person.

No sign of impartiality there with the opposite side not invited.


----------



## Tink (23 August 2017)

imv, this is the biggest change pushed on our society.

Mothers and Fathers are important, and the children need both.
Each one is different, yet needed in a childs life.
How has our society changed its view that parents are not important.
Who is selling this rubbish.

Are your parents important, are your grandparents important.
We respect our elders and our ancestors, we build on from them.
We don't think we are better.

As for the same sex, they have their unions which were set up for them to be the same as heterosexuals.
Why are they demanding the word 'Marriage'.

Marriage is one man and one woman.
It is about FAMILY.
Changing that, changes our demographics, our language, our culture.

imv, this is about stripping our culture completely.

A man and a woman is equal.
Children should be taught that in all schools, imv.
The gold standard.
It should not be changed.

--------------------------------------------
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/same-sex-marriage-yes-or-no.33354/


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> ABC Breakfast had the gay lobby on again today, Magda Zubanski and some other person.
> 
> No sign of impartiality there with the opposite side not invited.





And some women with crocodile tears playing herself up as an advocate for the poor defenseless homosexuals being picked on via negative brain waves and counter intuitive arguments from the evil straight people... I almost sympathy cried 'til I stopped.


----------



## Tink (24 August 2017)

They should merge SBS and the ABC.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2017)

ABC is censoring its twitter threads to exclude counter arguments to SSM. Some have been reduced to only a couple of tweets damming dozens of deleted tweets that run counter to the ABC's pro homosexual agenda.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2017)

There are two Guthrie women on the ABC board. Apparently unrelated, but it was Vanessa Guthrie who sent the lump of coal to Scott Morrison, later adopted by Joyce as a cringe worthy big laugh in Parliament.

What is it that executives who have served time in big private enterprise, feel it is necessary project bolshevik socialism onto the minions when they get into the ABC?


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2017)

I've just posted the idea of separate legislation on the News Breakfast facebook page. Will be interesting to see the reaction.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I've just posted the idea of separate legislation on the News Breakfast facebook page. Will be interesting to see the reaction.





I got hate messages from the gays on their (ABC Breakfast) twitter account. To say they were low grade gutter abuses would be an understatement LOL.

WARNING don't ever refer to homosexuality as a disability on twitter or facebook


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2017)

Drum on ABC is currently doing its best to advocate for SSM


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Drum on ABC is currently doing its best to advocate for SSM




So was Leigh Sales again, under the guise of a story getting young people enrolled to vote, obviously in the belief that they are more likely to support SSM.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So was Leigh Sales again, under the guise of a story getting young people enrolled to vote, obviously in the belief that they are more likely to support SSM.




The media and film have always attracted the careless and carefree. Big wonder why people buy magazines to keep in lockstep with their aberrant lifestyles.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2017)

SSM discussion on News 24 showed about 10  shots of gays getting married/kissing etc but no traditional marriage shots.

One may tend to think the ABC was pushing a position.


----------



## Logique (6 September 2017)

Dick Smith is none too pleased with the ABC, and is launching his own advertising
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...against-alleged-abc-bias-20170905-gybejm.html


----------



## Tisme (6 September 2017)

Logique said:


> Dick Smith is none too pleased with the ABC, and is launching his own advertising
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...against-alleged-abc-bias-20170905-gybejm.html





Do you think the political parties are scared of the ABC, as Dick suggests, or that they actually want migration from wherever?


----------



## PZ99 (6 September 2017)

This is the same guy that stood up for David Hicks yeah? 

This attack on the ABC just goes to show his rank hypocrisy. On one hand he complains about the ABC "warping our democratic process" but then wants to donate $2million to marginal seat candidates... in other words "warp our democratic process" with money to favour his own viewpoint.

Does this swinging dick really think he can buy my vote? Maybe he should save his donations for when Australia becomes a welfare society for the aged when we can no longer pull in tax revenue from a dwindling pool of immigrant workers.

His credibility is melting quicker than that fake iceberg he towed into Sydney 30 odd years ago.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2017)

PZ99 said:


> His credibility is melting quicker than that fake iceberg he towed into Sydney 30 odd years ago.




I actually agree with most things he says about population.

We used to need people to work in the mines, fields and factories, but these employment sources are disappearing as technology takes over.

We simply need less people bought in by immigration, the jobs aren't there anymore as evidenced by stagnating wages, but the migrant mafia has turned immigration into a social issue when it has always been an economic one.


----------



## PZ99 (6 September 2017)

The jobs are there.... but not being taken up. This usually boils down to two aspects. The wages are crap (say fruit picking) or the skills aren't there (say medical).

The point is our birth rate isn't sufficient to fund our future prosperity.. so it has to be imported.

The alternatives are either higher taxes, axing social programs or going broke.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 September 2017)

PZ99 said:


> The point is our birth rate isn't sufficient to fund our future prosperity.. so it has to be imported.




Pointless if you can't find jobs for them. Technology is killing jobs in every industry. Instead of giving tax cuts to business they should go to consumers to buy the goods and services produced.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 September 2017)

Of all the foster families in the community, the ABC decide to publicise a gay couple on Australian Story.

Political ? Nah.

http://www.abc.net.au/austory/


----------



## basilio (11 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Of all the foster families in the community, the ABC decide to publicise a gay couple on Australian Story.
> 
> Political ? Nah.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/austory/




Maybe they are just reporting  and highlighting the fact that these two men have adopted and raised six girls from diverse backgrounds over 20 years and the outcomes are a credit to everyone involved.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 September 2017)

basilio said:


> Maybe they are just reporting  and highlighting the fact that these two men have adopted and raised six girls from diverse backgrounds over 20 years and the outcomes are a credit to everyone involved.




A lot of other people do the same thing.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 September 2017)

I note they adopted girls not boys.
Good idea and outcome.
I wonder if it was their choice.


----------



## wayneL (11 September 2017)

basilio said:


> Maybe they are just reporting  and highlighting the fact that these two men have adopted and raised six girls from diverse backgrounds over 20 years and the outcomes are a credit to everyone involved.



Such quaint naivete 

As if Pravda didn't move heaven and earth to find a gay couple. 

Come on bas!


----------



## basilio (11 September 2017)

So my little Cynic (thats you Wayne)  no matter where the story of the two gay guys who raise 6 adopted girls is promoted it's still rainbow propaganda ?


----------



## Tisme (11 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Of all the foster families in the community, the ABC decide to publicise a gay couple on Australian Story.
> 
> Political ? Nah.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/austory/




Coincidence rumpole. It's kind of like watching an articulate Muslim on "the panel" , amazing that someone like that could grasp the task. 

The one half was on the breakfast show too, and he is to be commended for taking in unwanteds and he comes across as earstwhile, but he knows fully well he's using his relationship wards to advance his marital cause. The children are taking second placing and used as ammunition. 

There was a time foster children were removed from households where they were being used for gain.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2017)

The ABC always uses this picture of two men snogging whenever they run a SSM story.

It's disgusting and offensive in my opinion,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-28/high-court-ssm-survey-challenge-reasons-published/8996824


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2017)

Looks like a shirtfront to me


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2017)

At last the ABC is doing something sensible.IMO

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/abcs-lateline-axed-reports-20171004-gyumxq.html

If it couldn't become a neutrally  balanced programme, it eventually would have to go, it is a shame as the potential was always there.


----------



## Tisme (5 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> At last the ABC is doing something sensible.IMO
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/abcs-lateline-axed-reports-20171004-gyumxq.html
> 
> If it couldn't become a neutrally  balanced programme, it eventually would have to go, it is a shame as the potential was always there.




When you turn on the ABC in the morning you get Victoria lecturing everyone about the merits and commonsense of SSM, Islam, etc, with Michael being the nodding head, the afternoon is more of the same and then great programs like 7:30 and Lateline also turned into megaphones for the repugnant causes.

I'm fairly sure the charter was factual reporting and investigative journalism, not the incubator and nursery for homosexuals, Islam, ugly people, native racists and misandrists ... that was SBS' job.


----------



## basilio (5 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> When you turn on the ABC in the morning you get Victoria lecturing everyone about the merits and commonsense of SSM, Islam, etc, with Michael being the nodding head, the afternoon is more of the same and then great programs like 7:30 and Lateline also turned into megaphones for the repugnant causes.
> 
> I'm fairly sure the charter was factual reporting and investigative journalism, not the incubator and nursery for homosexuals, Islam, ugly people, native racists and misandrists ... that was SBS' job.




God you talk some absolute sxite Tis. Or is this just an ongoing example of your culturally peculiar humour ? If this language is part of the accepted debate in ASF it's no wonder people come, read and flee.


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> When you turn on the ABC in the morning you get Victoria lecturing everyone about the merits and commonsense of SSM, Islam, etc, with Michael being the nodding head, the afternoon is more of the same and then great programs like 7:30 and Lateline also turned into megaphones for the repugnant causes.
> .




IMO there is nothing wrong with the subject matter, as it is very current.
I just can't stand the subject being delivered, as you say, "as a personal lecture" rather than a meaningful reflection of the facts.
That really is the whole problem with journalists today, they can't deliver information in a meaningful way, they can only deliver the information from their personal point of view.
This in turn makes the information non factual, unless the journalist has some qualification in the subject matter.
They really have become lost in their own self importance, at the expense of their professionalism. I don't watch any current affairs programme's and very little news, because of the presenters. Unfortunately it isn't channel specific, they are either right wing or left wing, I haven't seen any that just present the facts.


----------



## Logique (5 October 2017)

ABC is axing _Lateline_, and frankly good riddance. A once great program, it had had become little more than a luvvie soapbox

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...3300/?ncid=edlinkauhpmg00000003?benref=theage


----------



## Boggo (5 October 2017)

Good riddance to Stan (can I have the dark make up please) Grant and his silly program.
He was the goose who recently said that he has never heard of a place called Ayers Rock


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2017)

Boggo said:


> Good riddance to Stan (can I have the dark make up please) Grant and his silly program.
> He was the goose who recently said that he has never heard of a place called Ayers Rock




Yes, hopefully the era of political correctness which allows no one but Journo's to speak, has come to an end. 
All it achieved was the radicalization of journalists, who had the right to speak over, or rudely cut off anyone that didn't agree with them.
The last few years, has brought about a culture in journalism, where they feel they are the font of all knowledge. 
It bores me $hitless listening to them, re write history, tell us how we should think, vote, live, spend, eat and anything else they can dream up to dribble on about.


----------



## Tisme (10 October 2017)

I'm starting to think good riddance to the ABC in general. Apart from some genuine entertainment, it seem heavily skewed to becoming a marketing tool for neo socialist/liberals. 

I can only think management has been infiltrated by cooptive agendas that are at odds with neutral reporting, balanced journalism and traditional Australian value systems. 

It's fast becoming an infuriatingly opinionated organisation that will see its own demise as it eventually alienates it's core followers and replaces them with self indulgent airheads demanding social change for the sake of change.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm starting to think good riddance to the ABC in general. Apart from some genuine entertainment, it seem heavily skewed to becoming a marketing tool for neo socialist/liberals.
> 
> I can only think management has been infiltrated by cooptive agendas that are at odds with neutral reporting, balanced journalism and traditional Australian value systems.
> 
> It's fast becoming an infuriatingly opinionated organisation that will see its own demise as it eventually alienates it's core followers and replaces them with self indulgent airheads demanding social change for the sake of change.




 I think you are right up to a point. Maybe when this SSM stuff is decided one way or another they will stop trumpetting it's propaganda and go back to serious reporting. Apart from that issue and the fact that they push indigenous agendas fairly often, I still trust them more than any commercial outlet, as do most of the population, but unfortunately they are dumbing down a lot of their reporting and focussing on the reporter's opinions rather than the facts.


----------



## Tisme (10 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think you are right up to a point. Maybe when this SSM stuff is decided one way or another they will stop trumpetting it's propaganda and go back to serious reporting. Apart from that issue and the fact that they push indigenous agendas fairly often, I still trust them more than any commercial outlet, as do most of the population, but unfortunately they are dumbing down a lot of their reporting and focussing on the reporter's opinions rather than the facts.





There is no doubt they have better pedigree than the commercial featherweights, but we should be using the same deflection argument style that VC, Bas and Luu use (one wrong justifies another wrong or less wrong is better than a worse wrong)

Four Corners is a living fossil of what the ABC was, News Breakfast is a living fossil of what the mogul commercial stations were. 

Compare QANDA first year with QANDA now. Compare Lateline now with Lateline under Kerry O'Brien, etc.,  et al ...  have turned into fluff reporting with a social agenda backbones, rather than fearless reporting and examination:- snowflakes I think is the current term.

It's supposed to "balance between broadcasting programs of wide appeal and specialized broadcasting programs" .... lately there is no balance whatsoever that disagrees with their social dogma. They hide behind the various legislations as reason for being a vehicle for social upheaval and they use the reputation built over a long  long time to give the impression of impartiality when statistically they skew their programming content and timing to suit their anti white anti anglo agenda.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 October 2017)

The ABC is now the official organisational mouthpiece for whingers.

Now it's girls complaining they don't get treated the same as boys. Not FACTS mind you, just their opinions.

It's been all over the Breakfast show today ad nauseum.

The ABC should get a life and go back to reporting things that affect us all. Yesterday they cut off a speech by Alan Finkel at the Energy summit to re-broadcast (for about the tenth time) a story about Catalonian independence. How many Catalonians are there in Australia ffs?


----------



## Tisme (11 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC is now the official organisational mouthpiece for whingers.
> 
> Now it's girls complaining they don't get treated the same as boys. Not FACTS mind you, just their opinions.
> 
> ...





Facebook is their other heavy vehicle of getting to the minds of the millenials. As soon as a pidgeon posts a NO case on any one of the multitude of ABC threads promoting SSM there is a swarm of hysterical retards who go to town on their new victim.... these are the same licentious, degenerate  imbeciles who have wrongly been given equality to vote, even though they lack the moral fibre to keep our country great and unique.

When Abbott gets back in there is going to be trouble for the ABC big time me thinks.


----------



## Logique (12 October 2017)

A free kick to 'Crooked' Hillary, provided by our national broadcaster. Watch for all those tough questions about the Clinton Foundation, the private email server, Kosovo terror, the Benghazi attack..

I suspect this will be a soft focus puff piece - Hillary the sisterhood victim, and how that beastly Donald was mean to her.







> http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/
> Hillary Clinton
> In a special edition of Four Corners, Hillary Clinton, in her only Australian television interview, talks with Sarah Ferguson.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wysiwyg (12 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> As soon as a pidgeon posts a NO case on any one of the multitude of ABC threads promoting SSM there is a swarm of hysterical retards who go to town on their new victim.... these are the same licentious, degenerate  imbeciles who have wrongly been given equality to vote, even though they lack the moral fibre to keep our country great and unique.



Q&A has opinions streaming at the bottom of the screen which are 90% ill-informed trash. The wise and informed people don't tweet anything so it is a stupid idea. Maybe the ABC see it as a way for the young rebellious (and many of us rebelled at that ill-informed stage of development) to vent their root cause frustration - lack of real sex and amphetamine dependence.  The only fix at the moment is to mask tape the lower part of the screen.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> their root cause frustration - lack of real sex and amphetamine dependence.




reworked : ".... their root cause frustration -  amphetamine dependence and lack of real sex" ?

You are venturing into the murky waters of precision truths, without logical fallacies, non factual rhetoric,  press and media pap, etc as supporting substantiation. How do you expect to win an argument using self evident actuality as your platform?


----------



## Logique (12 October 2017)

Dear Emma, holding the company line, to the last..but she'll be just fine at _Their ABC_, she's the right demographic you see..







> _*Lateline*_,* a Climate Change Casualty*
> By Roger Franklin, Quadrant Online:
> http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2017/10/lateline-climate-change-casualty/
> Taking a break from *tweeting energetically in support of gay marriage*, Lateline compere Emma Alberici has provided a pithy explanation for her show’s cancellation... '_it has passed its use-by date and can no longer pull a worthwhile audience_'...
> ...


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2017)

I see Mr SSM himself, Ben Elton, has arrived at the ABC under the guise of promoting his Three Summers picture. Just in time to secure the vote and subsequent celebrations, parades and the street theatre bas loves so much.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 October 2017)

Did I see the ABC News Breakfast finance reporter flogging gay marriage on News Breakfast ?

What next, is the weatherman going to have a go ? The water boy ?

Bluddy hell, I thought the ABC "did not take a position on gay marriage".


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Did I see the ABC News Breakfast finance reporter flogging gay marriage on News Breakfast ?
> 
> What next, is the weatherman going to have a go ? The water boy ?
> 
> Bluddy hell, I thought the ABC "did not take a position on gay marriage".





I can visualise those people on breakfast a few years on and their offspring coming to them, after a lifetime of anti Anglo domestic brainwashing,  declaring their natural born desire to take a goat, not just any goat mind you, as their partner. A fly on the wall would get some great pics of  facial contortions and elevated language on that day I bet.


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2017)

The ABC have been running a prepared piece since last night about the totalitarian status of the Chinese President and the "sycophantic media and press" as if that is somehow a foreign concept.

Perhaps someone should tell them about e.g. The Courier Mail and the LNP relationship or more introspectively the ABC and it's Invisible social manipulating master


----------



## SirRumpole (25 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> The ABC have been running a prepared piece since last night about the totalitarian status of the Chinese President and the "sycophantic media and press" as if that is somehow a foreign concept.
> 
> Perhaps someone should tell them about e.g. The Courier Mail and the LNP relationship or more introspectively the ABC and it's Invisible social manipulating master




Or the Murdoch media in general,of which the Liberal Party seems to be a wholly owned subsidiary.


----------



## wayneL (25 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Or the Murdoch media in general,of which the Liberal Party seems to be a wholly owned subsidiary.



it doesn't look that way from the position of a true conservative


----------



## SirRumpole (25 October 2017)

wayneL said:


> it doesn't look that way from the position of a true conservative




Of course, but "true" conservatives, like "true" Marxists can't see the woods for the propaganda.


----------



## sptrawler (25 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Or the Murdoch media in general,of which the Liberal Party seems to be a wholly owned subsidiary.




Or the Fairfax media, which the labor Party seem to be a wholly owned subsidiary.

I suppose with the two major media outlets, supporting different Parties, it brings about some sort of balance.


----------



## overhang (25 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Or the Fairfax media, which the labor Party seem to be a wholly owned subsidiary.
> 
> I suppose with the two major media outlets, supporting different Parties, it brings about some sort of balance.




Fairfax seems to be a lot more balanced than News corp or the Guardian which just seem to be the direct opposites.


----------



## wayneL (25 October 2017)

overhang said:


> Fairfax seems to be a lot more balanced than News corp or the Guardian which just seem to be the direct opposites.



LMAO


----------



## moXJO (25 October 2017)

overhang said:


> Fairfax seems to be a lot more balanced than News corp or the Guardian which just seem to be the direct opposites.



That depends on how far to the left you are standing. Personally I find fairfax full of whinging sjws.


----------



## overhang (26 October 2017)

moXJO said:


> That depends on how far to the left you are standing. Personally I find fairfax full of whinging sjws.



They actually give space for Liberal and former Liberal politicians to write editorials.  They might be left leaning but they're a lot closer to center than any Murdoch press.


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

overhang said:


> They actually give space for Liberal and former Liberal politicians to write editorials.  They might be left leaning but they're a lot closer to center than any Murdoch press.



Yeppers. And the irony is Murdoch avoids tax to the tune of double the running costs of the ABC.

Maybe the Govt should kill two birds with one stone on this. Send a court order to Murdoch to compulsorily acquire the ABC for the exact amount of tax he has avoided over the years...

The ABC will become just another right wing soap opera with close to zero value and zero relevance and Murdoch can flog it off... if he can. (_ he can also sell the ABC if he wishes LOL_ )


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I actually agree with most things he says about population.
> 
> We used to need people to work in the mines, fields and factories, but these employment sources are disappearing as technology takes over.
> 
> We simply need less people bought in by immigration, the jobs aren't there anymore as evidenced by stagnating wages, but the migrant mafia has turned immigration into a social issue when it has always been an economic one.



Looks like the people are on your side with this one Rumpole 

Aussies back immigration cut: poll > http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...l/news-story/13a2d3673ee1dc1cd6449a18327d7fd5

Will be watching how this experiment unfolds in NZ who have just elected a Govt with that very policy... and, just to pay lip service to the topic I might quickly add the ABC will be relied upon to give completely unbiased coverage of these events. LOL


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2017)

overhang said:


> They actually give space for Liberal and former Liberal politicians to write editorials.  They might be left leaning but they're a lot closer to center than any Murdoch press.



Yeah very few.
News stories have been negative libs and labor for a while now (minus editorials from the usual righties).


----------



## bellenuit (26 October 2017)

overhang said:


> They actually give space for Liberal and former Liberal politicians to write editorials.  They might be left leaning but they're a lot closer to center than any Murdoch press.




Actually it's something that the Murdoch press do to when it comes to Labor and other left wing politicians. And I think you will find that The Australian in particular provides a much broader spectrum of opinion that does Fairfax and certainly a lot more than the ABC. Even diehard commies like Philip Adams have a prime spot on the Weekend Magazine to give his views.


----------



## overhang (26 October 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Actually it's something that the Murdoch press do to when it comes to Labor and other left wing politicians. And I think you will find that The Australian in particular provides a much broader spectrum of opinion that does Fairfax and certainly a lot more than the ABC. Even diehard commies like Philip Adams have a prime spot on the Weekend Magazine to give his views.




We will just have to disagree on that.  But I fail to see how anyone who reads Murdoch press or the Guardian could ever view the ABC as impartial due to how biased both tabloids are.  I've even seen lefties lately complaining of right wing bias with the ABC.  Unlike any other news source they actually have a charter to adhere to that demands it remain non-partisan.  To suggest that Newscorp gives a broader spectrum of opinions than the ABC is quite a stretch of the imagination.


----------



## Tisme (27 October 2017)

balanced and fair:

https://twitter.com/BreakfastNews/status/923680157830746112


----------



## SirRumpole (27 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> balanced and fair:
> 
> https://twitter.com/BreakfastNews/status/923680157830746112




Had to turn that bloke off.

More propaganda, I hope the whole thing goes down just to teach the ABC a lesson about biased reporting.

No doubt the ABC will be replaying this rubbish ad nauseum throughout the day.


----------



## Tisme (17 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Had to turn that bloke off.
> 
> More propaganda, I hope the whole thing goes down just to teach the ABC a lesson about biased reporting.
> 
> No doubt the ABC will be replaying this rubbish ad nauseum throughout the day.




ABC celebrating their triumph:


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2017)

How sweet . I wonder how much they paid for the child.


----------



## IFocus (17 November 2017)

You guys must have been raised in the perfect hetro relationships pity you ignore reality.

Where I grew up incest was rampant, child abuse common (kids turning up to school black and blue) any of those kids could only dream of being raised in a loving family


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2017)

IFocus said:


> Where I grew up incest was rampant, child abuse common (kids turning up to school black and blue)




Not in my experience, and we certainly weren't upper class.


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2017)

IFocus said:


> You guys must have been raised in the perfect hetro relationships pity you ignore reality.
> 
> Where I grew up incest was rampant, child abuse common (kids turning up to school black and blue) any of those kids could only dream of being raised in a loving family




Then even more the imperative to promote good parenting by removing ALL child abuse conditioning. Promoting one social disease because of other social diseases is not striking at the heart of the disease, it's spreading it.

I am with Rumpole, I never noticed black and blue kids or incest victims at my school or into my adulthood and I was raised in roughhouse poverty town.


----------



## moXJO (18 November 2017)

IFocus said:


> Where I grew up incest was rampant, child abuse common (kids turning up to school black and blue) any of those kids could only dream of being raised in a loving family



Rampant where I grew up as well.


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2017)

A retro look back at Campbell Newman on ABC.

Campbell was a show pony who, as Mayor of Brisbane took the credit for the flood cleanup by making great use of his backers, the 100% anti Labor rag The Courier Mail  to make out his "mud army" saved the day, when in fact they were loaded into buses and travelled around like tourists, unable to do anything because the WH&S/OH&S inductions and methods statements prevented them doing anything.

He is insightful here on Malcolm, but who wasn't:


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-07/campbell-newman-biography-banned-from-avid-reader/6832820


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2017)

Here's a woman who deserves respect.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-...redible-grief-and-forged-her-own-path/9174296


----------



## overhang (28 November 2017)

So the youth activist network triple j have upped the ante in their social conditioning program by moving the date of their iconic hottest 100 countdown from Australia Day to the last Saturday of Jan.  They claim it was reached via a democratic process but when they ask questions like this it's quite obvious there was only ever going to be one outcome.


----------



## dutchie (3 December 2017)

Proof that the ABC is bias and that Jonathon Green is a w@nker!
From Tim Blair...
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/b...d/news-story/6004bf297d16facca0a48f8180726679


Jonathan Green usually enjoys watching terrified, whimpering victims being torn apart by a pack of dumb animals. But he isn’t so happy about it when the victim is Jonathan Green.

ABC radio’s Saturday morning sedative made himself a target on Friday by posting a few inoffensive lines about British visitor Milo Yiannopoulos:

from Green twitter:
"just for the record, i'm no fan of censorious no-platforming. I think Milo is hilarious. A sharp and very self-aware showman. Some risky ideas, some bad ideas. but they are only made dangerous by being withheld and mythologised."

Green’s mildly contrarian view immediately enraged Twitter’s doglike leftist hordes – many of them previous admirers of Green and the ABC.

Didn’t Jonathan know, they asked, that Milo is “an enabler of cruelty and bullying”?

Didn’t he know “the views of white supremacists” put us “at risk”?

Didn’t he know he’d just defended a “Nazi propagandist”?

Was Jonathan not aware that allowing the likes of Milo Yiannopoulos to speak “is literally how the fascists won in European countries in the first half of the 20th century”?

The ABC presenter held out for a time, darting this way and that while accurately noting the pomposity and self-righteousness of his pursuers. But the pack was on his trail and would not relent.

On Saturday Green finally caved in, much as will a fox’s throat when crushed by a hound’s mighty jaws:
from Green twitter:
"Sitting in a small puddle of foolishness and regret re things I said yesterday. Still feel that exposure is a better antidote than exclusion but see that this is a position reeking of unexamined privilege. Mine. Which is clearly abundant. I should match it with contrition."


Well, he’s definitely sitting in a small puddle of _something_.


----------



## Macquack (3 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Promoting one social disease because of other social diseases is not striking at the heart of the disease, it's spreading it.
> .



You supposedly socialise with these disease ridden folk. Better watch out you don't catch their disease.


----------



## Tisme (4 December 2017)

Macquack said:


> You supposedly socialise with these disease ridden folk. Better watch out you don't catch their disease.




Can't let it go can you . Hate has such a negative impact on your health and mental wellbeing, but be my guest


----------



## Tisme (6 December 2017)

Last week of Lateline

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/the-humans-of-lateline:-a-look-back-at-our-most/9229754


----------



## sptrawler (7 December 2017)

Yes, I found it interesting watching their wind up clips, to me it showed the flaw perfectly.
Most Labor politician clips, where a smiling happy face, most Liberal politicians looked stressed.
Pretty well sums up lateline, IMO
When you are airing a controversial programme, it is about testing the policies of both parties, not about biasing a viewpoint to align with your bent.
It will be interesting to see how the reporters perform, when they have to deliver the programme to an open audience.
Maybe they will have to wait untill the next election, for their next job. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (7 December 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Most Labor politician clips, where a smiling happy face, most Liberal politicians looked stressed.
> Pretty well sums up lateline, IMO




No, it pretty well sums up the current state of politics in the country.

Labor 53%   LNP 47%   TPP


----------



## sptrawler (7 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> No, it pretty well sums up the current state of politics in the country.
> 
> Labor 53%   LNP 47%   TPP




Yes, your pretty well right, and in W.A I'm very happy with the new Labor Government.

They have introduced draconian measures, the LNP would never have been been able to introduce.
So I'm pretty happy.


----------



## Tisme (18 December 2017)

> The ABC are at it again, this time attacking Milo Yiannopoulos. Attacking someone just because they have a different political view, ignoring their personal circumstances.
> 
> The ABC are great at taking our tax dollars while attacking everything great about our country! The ABC hates Australia and they hate patriotism. The ABC are full of hate, vitriol and personal attack on anyone who stands in the way of their loopy left wing agenda.
> 
> ...




Malcolm Roberts




2.30 in


----------



## Logique (31 December 2017)

ABC Radio says: 
"_Yours News Now, Without Bias or Agenda_"

They really are completely shameless. Trump, climate change, SSM, and back again.


----------



## Logique (1 January 2018)

Stories you'll never hear on 'Their ABC':







> Saturday, 30 December 2017 - Grand Jury, Subpoenas and next steps in the *Clinton Foundation criminal investigation* - Charles Ortel on New York's PRN's Leid Stories - http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...n-criminal-investigation-charles-ortel-o.html



And glossed over will be the fact that the recent Russia diplomatic imbroglio came from a foreign power having 'dirt' on 'Crooked Hillary'.  Teflon Hillary and Bill.


----------



## Tisme (29 January 2018)

ABC Breakfast surprisingly not mentioning that Margaret Court is still 4 games ahead of Roger and she's been out in the lead for 48 years, so it's not like they don't know.


----------



## sptrawler (29 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> ABC Breakfast surprisingly not mentioning that Margaret Court is still 4 games ahead of Roger and she's been out in the lead for 48 years, so it's not like they don't know.




Yes, she won't get any airplay, she isn't gay.


----------



## Tisme (5 February 2018)

ABC currently dedicating more coverage to Abbott's sister's "marriage" than less important things like the destruction of habitat, of our heritage, of our leisure, of our morality, of the family, etc.

While our children are being turned into drones to serve a global kumbaya, we (them) are feeding on a diet of shallow soapyesque news ourselves.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> ABC currently dedicating more coverage to Abbott's sister's "marriage" than less important things like the destruction of habitat, of our heritage, of our leisure, of our morality, of the family, etc.
> 
> While our children are being turned into drones to serve a global kumbaya, we (them) are feeding on a diet of shallow soapyesque news ourselves.




And another half hour will be wasted on Australian Lesbian Story tonight.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2018)

The ABC has gone Chinese.

Bloody hell, do the Chinese have to have a finger in Our ABC ??

On their online news page


The City of Perth saga descends into farce, but the final act is yet to come
Could Titanic still win 11 Oscars in 2018?
China cites Australian critics to trash Clive Hamilton's controversial new book
Trump's tariffs not great for Australia, but terrible for the US
Is Putin bluffing? It's hard to say how worried the West should be
When Mardi Gras is over, Indigenous LGBTI people still walk a lonely road
How celebrity power can affect the stock market — for better or worse
【分析】澳大利亚存在冒着经济崩溃风险的“僵尸经济”吗？
Yes, the 'cheerleader effect' is real
Bullying claim behind Cash outburst is clutching at straws
Click the link and you get a whole news story in Chinese.

http://www.abc.net.au/chinese/2018-03-02/australian-zombie-economy/9498932


----------



## boofhead (3 March 2018)

ABC also has indonesian language news.


----------



## bellenuit (3 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC has gone Chinese.
> 
> Bloody hell, do the Chinese have to have a finger in Our ABC ??
> 
> ...




The article title: [Analysis] Is there a "zombie economy" in Australia that runs the risk of economic collapse?


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> The article title: [Analysis] Is there a "zombie economy" in Australia that runs the risk of economic collapse?




This is a link to the article of a similar title in English, but I just wonder about the reason for printing it in Chinese also. What about Russian or Nordic ? I just think that we a pandering to a certain nationality for some reason. And how do we know the articles are the same ? They may as well write it in code.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...my-sleepwalking-into-danger-gfc-china/9492868


----------



## boofhead (3 March 2018)

Copy and paste the text to a translation website. Maybe you missed what happened in John Alexander's by-election. High level of chinese speakers, some don't know english and a lot of the election material was produced in mandarin. I'm sure if you look for various pictures in John's campaign office at the time you'll see them.


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2018)

Driving the last nails in:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...tories-michelle-guthrie-says?CMP=share_btn_tw



> *ABC news should cover more human interest stories, Michelle Guthrie says*
> 
> 
> Managing director endorses review which calls on ABC bulletins to cover less political and national news
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (16 March 2018)

If they are going down fewer social justice roads, that would be good.


hip pocket stories are common to everyone not just minorities.


----------



## dutchie (18 March 2018)

TheirABC needs to be unfunded and removed.
Absolutely repulsive.

From Andrew Bolt:

The ABC is meant by law to be impartial, because it is taxpayer-funded. It is also meant to be culturally enriching. Instead we get foul-mouthed "comedians" ranting how an Australian Conservative politician and former SAS soldier is a "c..t".

How does ABC boss Michelle Guthrie excuse this?


----------



## Humid (18 March 2018)

dutchie said:


> TheirABC needs to be unfunded and removed.
> Absolutely repulsive.
> 
> From Andrew Bolt:
> ...







Here’s another 4 letter word starting with C


----------



## wayneL (18 March 2018)

Humid said:


> View attachment 86651
> 
> Here’s another 4 letter word starting with C



Really mature


----------



## DB008 (18 March 2018)

dutchie said:


> From Andrew Bolt:
> 
> The ABC is meant by law to be impartial, because it is taxpayer-funded. It is also meant to be culturally enriching. Instead we get foul-mouthed "comedians" ranting how an Australian Conservative politician and former SAS soldier is a "c..t".
> 
> How does ABC boss Michelle Guthrie excuse this?





https://www.acma.gov.au/

*Television complaints*
​If you see something on TV that you think breaches a code:


Complain directly to the station


If you don’t get a response within 60 days, or aren't satisfied with the response, you can complain to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
The ACMA cannot accept complaints about the quality or scheduling of programs, the content of advertisements, or advertising on the ABC.

If you see something that you think breaches a licence condition or a standard, you can make a complaint directly to the ACMA. Standards applicable to television include:


Children’s television standards


Anti-siphoning rules
Not sure where to address your complaint? Find out more .

You can access the broadcasting complaints form via the ACMA website


*ABC code of practice 2011 (revised in 2016)*​Pages: 5,6,7,8

http://about.abc.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ABCCodeOfPractice2016-1.pdf​
Standards:

4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality.

4.2 Present a diversity of perspectives so that, over time, no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented.

4.3 Do not state or imply that any perspective is the editorial opinion of the ABC. The ABC takes no editorial stance other than its commitment to fundamental democratic principles including the rule of law, freedom of speech and religion, parliamentary democracy and equality of opportunity.

4.4 Do not misrepresent any perspective.

4.5 Do not unduly favour one perspective over another.
Also, parts 5 (Honest and Fair Dealing), 7 (Harm and Offence) and 8 (Children and young people) should get a look at.

I tried to put all links in green above....


----------



## Humid (18 March 2018)

In future should I’ll use emojis


----------



## SirRumpole (18 March 2018)

DB008 said:


> If you see something on TV that you think breaches a code:




And good luck with that.


----------



## Logique (19 March 2018)

I object to taxpayer-funding the _Steve Vizard Show_. 

It presents as light skit comedy. It is anything but.  Nothing but an offensive juvenile anti-conservative rant, from beginning to end.

Then there's _The Drum_, which presents as a current affairs program. But _The Drum_ presents every news item through the prism of Left-wing politics. It is news re-interpreted.

Where are the centrist versions of these shows on the ABC?


----------



## sptrawler (19 March 2018)

Logique said:


> I object to taxpayer-funding the _Steve Vizard Show_.
> 
> It presents as light skit comedy. It is anything but.  Nothing but an offensive juvenile anti-conservative rant, from beginning to end.
> 
> ...




It isn't going to happen, the media is full of chardonay socialists, who smuggly sit back and bleat how unfortunate the poor are, while sitting on their balconies overlooking the harbour.


----------



## Tisme (26 March 2018)

Our public money well spent.  Start listening around the 14 minute mark to find out how men synchronise their cycles.

Our resident SJWs will probably explain how this is all God's plan and shame of black slavery in USA is  the reason the sun rises in the East.

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/the-hook-up/can-we-sync-our-periods/9544098


----------



## Tisme (27 March 2018)




----------



## CanOz (1 May 2018)

ABC Mouthing off again...


https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...tofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews#link_time=1525160276


----------



## PZ99 (1 May 2018)

In that case free speech is off again as well....

The reporter called it as it was IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 May 2018)

Probyn is probably right, although one may argue that Rudd was pretty destructive too.

I don't think that sort of opinion should be a function of journalism, but there seems to be a fine line between journalist and commentator these days.


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> In that case free speech is off again as well....
> 
> The reporter called it as it was IMO.



It's not a matter of free speech it's a matter of code of conduct whilst in the employ of an organisation.

If he wanted to say the same thing in his own time is quite welcome to do so even if absolutely inaccurate.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> In that case free speech is off again as well....
> 
> The reporter called it as it was IMO.




The question then is...was the destruction a god thing or a bad thing?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> The question then is...was the destruction a god thing or a bad thing?




Well, he's not PM any more. 

Was "god" a Freudian slip ?


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, he's not PM any more.
> 
> Was "god" a Freudian slip ?





You see the hump in this well known graph...I don't think he managed to scale its heights, but he gave it a good crack .....


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

One of ABC's favourite "sons" takes a swipe at Latham:

https://www.2gb.com/ben-fordham-and-mark-lathams-inglorious-career-are-in-trouble-on-twitter/


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> It's not a matter of free speech it's a matter of code of conduct whilst in the employ of an organisation.
> 
> If he wanted to say the same thing in his own time is quite welcome to do so even if absolutely inaccurate.



Yeah, right  

The broadcasting act of 1992 has the same impartiality requirement as the ABC act. Yet the likes of 2GB, the Australian newspaper and other Murdoch media violate this act with regular monotony and they do it under the guise of "free speech"

Code of conduct my arse.


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Yeah, right
> 
> The broadcasting act of 1992 has the same impartiality requirement as the ABC act. Yet the likes of 2GB, the Australian newspaper and other Murdoch media violate this act with regular monotony and they do it under the guise of "free speech"
> 
> Code of conduct my arse.



Maquarrie et al are not state broadcasters. 2gb never pretends to be anything but conservative. Likewise,  the Guardian never pretends to be anything but neomarxist,  post modern  tw@ts.

On the other hand,  the ABC's charter is for impartiability and advertises as such...  "without bias or agenda" I believe is their slogan. 

That is a downright lie.


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> Maquarrie et al are not state broadcasters. 2gb never pretends to be anything but conservative. Likewise,  the Guardian never pretends to be anything but neomarxist,  post modern  tw@ts.
> 
> On the other hand,  the ABC's charter is for impartiability and advertises as such...  "without bias or agenda" I believe is their slogan.
> 
> That is a downright lie.



It doesn't matter whether they are state broadcasters or not. 

If they are violating the code of conduct the ownership is irrelevant.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> It doesn't matter whether they are state broadcasters or not.
> 
> If they are violating the code of conduct the ownership is irrelevant.




Yes, I haven't seen any ABC commentators suspended over cash for comment.


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I haven't seen any ABC commentators suspended over cash for comment.



Neither have I. They don't do it, so we're unlikely to see it


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, I haven't seen any ABC commentators suspended over cash for comment.




Don't you remember when ex ABC man, Mike Carlton dropped a bucket over two ABC presenters back n the 1990s?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> Don't you remember when ex ABC man, Mike Carlton dropped a bucket over two ABC presenters back n the 1990s?




No I don't . I used to liten to MC regulary but missed the bucket drop. Who did he get ?

(My guesses would be Richard Carleton and Paul Lyneham).


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> No I don't . I used to liten to MC regulary but missed the bucket drop. Who did he get ?
> 
> (My guesses would be Richard Carleton and Paul Lyneham).




I'd have to troll the net for that. It was around the time of cash for comment and John Laws saga.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> I'd have to troll the net for that. It was around the time of cash for comment and John Laws saga.




I found this, but no names were named and nothing came of it as I remember.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s38344.htm


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> It doesn't matter whether they are state broadcasters or not.
> 
> If they are violating the code of conduct the ownership is irrelevant.



A small detail you may have missed is that it seems that the breach is of the ABC code of conduct, not broadcasting Services Act 1992. 

Therefore what Macquarie, Fairfax, news, The Guardian, or whoever else,  is irrelevant, it does not even apply to them.

In fact the term impartiality does not even appear in the 1992 act at all, not that I can find.


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> A small detail you may have missed is that it seems that the breach is of the ABC code of conduct, not broadcasting Services Act 1992.
> 
> Therefore what Macquarie, Fairfax, news, The Guardian, or whoever else,  is irrelevant, it does not even apply to them.
> 
> In fact the term impartiality does not even appear in the 1992 act at all, not that I can find.



Nope, I didn't miss any detail.  I clearly covered it in post 2771 when I said the broadcasting act of 1992 has the same impartiality requirement as the ABC act.

The broadcasting act for television and radio have the same code of impartially and a separate one for print / internet and they all have the same code.

TV (3.4)
Radio (3.1)
3.
1.1 Impartiality
1.1.1 In broadcasting a news Program, a Licensee must:​
a) present news fairly and impartially;

b) clearly distinguish the reporting of factual material from commentary and analysis.

https://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/Abo...schemes-index-radio-content-regulation-i-acma

All forms of media in this country are supposed to be impartial when it comes to news reports.


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Nope, I didn't miss any detail.  I clearly covered it in post 2771 when I said the broadcasting act of 1992 has the same impartiality requirement as the ABC act.
> 
> The broadcasting act for television and radio have the same code of impartially and a separate one for print / internet and they all have the same code.
> 
> ...



Ah,  right that didn't come up in a word search thanks for that. Cheers.

Nevertheless they have been pinged on the code and not on the ACT. The act refers to news reports and as far as I can tell,  the commercial stations are pretty squeaky clean there.  Commentary does not seem to come under the act or the code for impartiality. 

Therefore there is still no comparison.


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

I've seen/heard plenty of similar breaches on commercial stations on 6pm news particularly in the lead up to the 2013 election. Maybe the complainants weren't as loud as they are today 

I'm still calling this ping a nanny state response based entirely on a technicality and hopefully it's not a prelude to stifling free speech in this country. That's my 18cents worth


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2018)

SMH



> *Malcolm Turnbull lodges second complaint with the ABC about Emma Alberici*
> 
> 
> The Turnbull government has lodged a second series of complaints to the ABC about the network's chief economics correspondent Emma Alberici, this time over her reporting on innovation spending.
> ...


----------



## PZ99 (25 May 2018)

The last sentence says it all. The Comms minister would be better off using resources to address the NBN complaints instead of wasting it on a hate agenda with no possible outcome.

I'm glad the govt is freezing the funding though. If the ABC really is biased then marginal Lib seats will be the first to feel the cuts to services. Fine by me


----------



## wayneL (25 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> The last sentence says it all. The Comms minister would be better off using resources to address the NBN complaints instead of wasting it on a hate agenda with no possible outcome.
> 
> I'm glad the govt is freezing the funding though. If the ABC really is biased then marginal Lib seats will be the first to feel the cuts to services. Fine by me



What is this hate agenda?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> What is this hate agenda?




The Libs hate the ABC. Any argument about that ?


----------



## PZ99 (25 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> What is this hate agenda?



State owned media is the bane of the Coalition's existence - regardless of the on air content.

The Libs have been hating the ABC going right back to the Fraser daze.

They were in the firing line even when Peter Reith was writing his own inconsequential ramblings about IR laws for them almost every week.

I reckon sell off the ABC and give them something else to complain about - like reacquiring coal power stations that they themselves flogged off for nothing.


----------



## wayneL (25 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Libs hate the ABC. Any argument about that ?



The ABC hate the Libs.  Any argument about that?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> The ABC hate the Libs.  Any argument about that?




Yes.

The Libs have no conception of independent journalism if it doesn't involve sucking up to them.


----------



## wayneL (25 May 2018)

I see, Horace. 

Smear instead of discuss?


----------



## Tisme (25 May 2018)

Remember that Nationwide interview?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> I see, Horace.
> 
> Smear instead of discuss?




No, just stating facts.


----------



## wayneL (25 May 2018)

You are entitled to your own opinion,  Horace.  But you are not entitled to you own facts.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2018)

wayneL said:


> You are entitled to your own opinion,  Horace.  But you are not entitled to you own facts.




Well wayne, the ABC consistently comes out ahead in public polls on media reliability and credible journalism and most people want the ABC's funding maintained or increased, so I would have to say that the Libs are at odds with public opinion on the ABC.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-accuses-it-of-fake-news-20161222-gtgmqa.html


----------



## Tink (30 May 2018)

It is on the ABC now..

Far-right activist Tommy Robinson jailed for contempt of court

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/far-right-activist-tommy-robinson-jailed/9814524


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2018)

Tink said:


> It is on the ABC now..
> 
> Far-right activist Tommy Robinson jailed for contempt of court
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/far-right-activist-tommy-robinson-jailed/9814524




Seems a fair report of the events.


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Libs hate the ABC. Any argument about that ?



No argument about that.
Libs hate ALP
ABC = ALP
Thus Libs hate ABC


----------



## PZ99 (30 May 2018)

OK so he got done for contempt of court and has form for fraud and bashing people up.

He's eating porridge not because he is a bastion of free speech, but because he breaks the law.

It's a code of conduct thing right?


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Seems a fair report of the events.



Yes it was.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> OK so he got done for contempt of court




Wasn't he arrested for "breaching the peace" ?

Isn't there supposed to be a trial before someone gets sent to "porridge" ?


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> OK so he got done for contempt of court and has form for fraud and bashing people up.
> 
> He's eating porridge not because he is a bastion of free speech, but because he breaks the law.
> 
> It's a code of conduct thing right?




You are so right PZ99.

Tommy breaks the law (breach of contempt of court). In custody, sentenced, in jail within *4 hours *(a British record).

Pedophiles and child rapists all over the UK over the last *30 years - *still no convictions.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> OK so he got done for contempt of court and has form for fraud and bashing people up.
> 
> He's eating porridge not because he is a bastion of free speech, but because he breaks the law.
> 
> It's a code of conduct thing right?




Just contempt because of a live feed street filming of defendants as they came and went from court. 10 months for that and 3 for the previous warning in another case.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> You are so right PZ99.
> 
> Tommy breaks the law (breach of contempt of court). In custody, sentenced, in jail within *4 hours *(a British record).
> 
> Pedophiles and child rapists all over the UK over the last *30 years - *still no convictions.




Should have worn a cassock and rosary beads.


----------



## PZ99 (30 May 2018)

dutchie said:


> You are so right PZ99.
> 
> Tommy breaks the law (breach of contempt of court). In custody, sentenced, in jail within *4 hours *(a British record).
> 
> Pedophiles and child rapists all over the UK over the last *30 years - *still no convictions.



That's not a relevant comparison because it's not the same offense. 

Try replacing emotion with logic. 

Here, let me get you started > http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_australia_03.html


----------



## dutchie (30 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> That's not a relevant comparison because it's not the same offense.
> 
> Try replacing emotion with logic.
> 
> Here, let me get you started > http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_australia_03.html




First they came for Tommy.
Then they came for PZ99   ....... "but I'm innocent Judge, your not using any logic"........clink.


----------



## PZ99 (30 May 2018)

But I'm not innocent am I ? Nothing new there.

Try this one... _After the first incident, Davis warned her that he would find her in contempt if she did it again. She did, and in all, the judge issued 20 contempt citations against her and gave her five days in jail for each._

Keep reading > https://www.twincities.com/2012/09/...t-order-for-woman-who-wouldnt-stand-in-court/

So they didn't "first come for Tommy"

No response from ASF constituents that time.


----------



## Tisme (30 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> But I'm not innocent am I ? Nothing new there.
> 
> Try this one... _After the first incident, Davis warned her that he would find her in contempt if she did it again. She did, and in all, the judge issued 20 contempt citations against her and gave her five days in jail for each._
> 
> ...




I think it garnered mass interest because a blackout was imposed on the press


----------



## SirRumpole (9 June 2018)

The politics of the ABC, by one of the best journos around.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-09/laura-tingle-why-the-abc-is-a-political-football/9850360


----------



## dutchie (9 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The politics of the ABC, by one of the best journos around.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-09/laura-tingle-why-the-abc-is-a-political-football/9850360




"The difference, however, is that the ABC still strives to deliver a diversity of information, analysis and opinion to its audiences."
In your dreams Laura


----------



## SirRumpole (9 June 2018)

Not political but definitely gender biased. All of the ABC's "top 5" scientists for 2018 are female.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-06/meet-the-abcs-top-5-scientists-for-2018/9839468


----------



## Darc Knight (9 June 2018)

I certainly find ABC radio news and current affairs to be more balanced than Macquarie Radio. Only problem is ABC has too many segments on Aboriginal history, Feminism and other agendas. I get sick of the propaganda on Macquarie, but ABC Radio is too light on Current Affairs.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 June 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Only problem is ABC has too many segments on Aboriginal history, Feminism and other agendas.




Could not agree more.


----------



## dutchie (10 June 2018)

The, not so clever as he thinks, Malcolm Farr on Insiders this morning tried to smear the Government with the statement "very high unemployment". Even his fellow, left biased, panelists had to correct him that it was in fact low unemployment. When he heard this from them, he was most surprised. He obviously believes his own B.S.
The AlpBC is out of control.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 June 2018)

dutchie said:


> The, not so clever as he thinks, Malcolm Farr on Insiders this morning tried to smear the Government with the statement "very high unemployment". Even his fellow, left biased, panelists had to correct him that it was in fact low unemployment. When he heard this from them, he was most surprised. He obviously believes his own B.S.
> The AlpBC is out of control.




5.6% is not "low" unemployment. 3.5% is considered full employment, politicians say 5% is low unemployment so they can dampen public expectations of their performance.


----------



## Tisme (10 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> 5.6% is not "low" unemployment. 3.5% is considered full employment, politicians say 5% is low unemployment so they can dampen public expectations of their performance.




 USA is now 3.9%


----------



## wayneL (10 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> 5.6% is not "low" unemployment. 3.5% is considered full employment, politicians say 5% is low unemployment so they can dampen public expectations of their performance.



Wait till Bill is in, 5.6 will be considered unprecedentedly low


----------



## SirRumpole (10 June 2018)

wayneL said:


> Wait till Bill is in, 5.6 will be considered unprecedentedly low




What makes you say that wayne ?


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2018)

I see Bill is going to reverse the funding cuts to the ABC, if he wins office.
Well that's a no brainer, if I was Bill I would double the funding for the ABC, there's nothing but upside. IMO

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...ent-s-84m-cut-to-the-abc-20180611-p4zktp.html


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2018)

Entertaining, especially last line :


----------



## PZ99 (21 June 2018)

_"Privatise anything that moves" 
_
I wouldn't be surprised if Paul Keating took the view today that it should be privatised after all


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2018)

Nauru bans ABC from Pacific Islands Forum.

Maybe the ABC should start a discussion on that in farcebook or twatter, but they won't.


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2018)

ABC getting behind idiot who thinks she represents all women and the fight against men, who are, by and large, an evil parasitic race of people who use women's bodies to replicate their species.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> ABC getting behind idiot who thinks she represents all women and the fight against men, who are, by and large, an evil parasitic race of people who use women's bodies to replicate their species.




Did she actually say all men are rapists ?

She's a goose most of the time, but I don't think she actually said it.


----------



## PZ99 (3 July 2018)

Unlikely allies to the ABC in this case include Julie Bishop and Tony Abbott.

Haven't heard from Gillard yet


----------



## Tisme (4 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Did she actually say all men are rapists ?
> 
> She's a goose most of the time, but I don't think she actually said it.




The trouble is that we won't ever know unless the President of the house releases the spatial audio


----------



## Tisme (27 July 2018)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-24/we-are-racist-towards-robots-too-study-finds/10029548

"
Have you ever wondered why you rarely see a brown or black robot?

A couple of researchers at Monash University in Melbourne and Canterbury University in New Zealand were having trouble finding any — why were all the robots white?

It led them to investigate whether people ascribe race to robots, and if this changed their behaviour towards them.

What they discovered was that humans carry their racial biases over to robots (cont) "


----------



## dutchie (30 July 2018)

African crime gangs - protected by the ABC.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

dutchie said:


> African crime gangs - protected by the ABC.




ABC is the nursery and incubator for PC and social engineering in this country. It has made itself a clear target for the LNP to dismantle.. which is a shame because the legitimate stuff will get taken out with the trash.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> I has made itself a clear target for the LNP to dismantle..




Unless the LNP gets dismantled first.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Unless the LNP gets dismantled first.




I can't see that happening. The bogey, albeit hypertalk, of the same vociferous crowd who put the public through discomfort under Rudd and Gillard are still there.

My guess is that the LNP will have a comfortable majority after next poll May 18th.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> I can't see that happening. The bogey, albeit hypertalk, of the same vociferous crowd who put the public through discomfort under Rudd and Gillard are still there.
> 
> My guess is that the LNP will have a comfortable majority after next poll May 18th.




Six years for a government unless they have done something special is about the end of their rope.

The Libs have made a lot of blunders in their time, the Medicare co payment, covering up for the banks, giving lip service to wage stagnation, trying to give tax cuts to people who don't need it, the electricity fiasco... 

Unless another Tampa comes along they are in big trouble imo.


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

Saw a segment with Barry Cassidy the other day. That bloke is a dead set communist. 
He is against any changes to immigration policy and is fiercely protective of Chinese ownership of Australian assets including buying up occupying and changing the culture of entire suburbs.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

MrBurns said:


> Saw a segment with Barry Cassidy the other day. That bloke is a dead set communist.
> He is against any changes to immigration policy and is fiercely protective of Chinese ownership of Australian assets including buying up occupying and changing the culture of entire suburbs.




We must be watching different Barry Cassidy's. I've never seen anything like that.

Could you link to that segment ?


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Six years for a government unless they have done something special is about the end of their rope.
> 
> The Libs have made a lot of blunders in their time, the Medicare co payment, covering up for the banks, giving lip service to wage stagnation, trying to give tax cuts to people who don't need it, the electricity fiasco...
> 
> Unless another Tampa comes along they are in big trouble imo.




Yeah, but it's all about perception. There's a lot of middle class bogans out there who see their rise up the social ladder in jeopardy now money's getting tight, interest rates rising and property prices dropping....they'll cling to the false hope that the gentry party will keep them in the club.


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> We must be watching different Barry Cassidy's. I've never seen anything like that.
> 
> Could you link to that segment ?




I’ll try to find it...I was quite shocked 
They weren’t his exact words but the attitude was unmistakable


----------



## Darc Knight (30 July 2018)

Anyone who thinks the ABC is half as biased as Macquarie Radio has rocks in their heads. The ABC (radio) does give a lot of time to issues such as Feminism, Aboriginal history, and other agendas, but it's News and current affairs does report the good and bad of both sides of the divide.
Macquarie on the other hand is a propoganda tool of Conservative politics and the businesses which pay for advertising on their channel.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Anyone who thinks the ABC is half as biased as Macquarie Radio has rocks in their heads. The ABC (radio) does give a lot of time to issues such as Feminism, Aboriginal history, and other agendas, but it's News and current affairs does report the good and bad of both sides of the divide.
> Macquarie on the other hand is a propoganda tool of Conservative politics and the businesses which pay for advertising on their channel.





There shouldn't be any bias in the ABC. Journalism should reflect the news, not fabricate and manipulate it. The drama shows are the showcase for personal agendas and in my view, for the ABC, they should carry a warning that they are a work of fiction or social engineering. Commercial stations are transparently a constant work of fiction.

How Four Corners has managed to survive a similar fate as Lateline is compelling, the latter being one of the few interactive forums where we could see the imbeciles running the country showing their duplicities.

The shock jocks do it because they can and the money/notoriety/fame that comes with it is like an an aphrodisiac. The listeners like anger and joy highs the scallywag talk delivers.


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> We must be watching different Barry Cassidy's. I've never seen anything like that.
> 
> Could you link to that segment ?




It's on the Insiders web site but the only link is to Twitter - but the heading is This week on #InsidersExtra @barriecassidy on the radical immigration idea that almost went unnoticed #Insiders #auspol
I got the strong impression that he agreed with the stance made by Hawke and Howard was wrong, time has proven Howard correct and anyone who doesn't see it worries me.


----------



## moXJO (30 July 2018)

Abc was blasted about its own bit of "fake news" in regards to "preparing to bomb iran nuclear sites".


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

I can confirm the ABC is biased. All they've done all day today is talk about the LNP


----------



## wayneL (23 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I can confirm the ABC is biased. All they've done all day today is talk about the LNP



So is that biased bastard Bill Shorten


----------



## Logique (23 August 2018)

All over it the ABC, and to be fair, all the other outlets. Nothing the journos love more than a good leadership spill. But right or wrong, people are interested in this stuff.

The ABC's choice of Coalition leader, probably gone now. They'll be merciless on whoever comes next.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2018)

ABC's Tom Ballard's take on the latest political stink:

WARNING its the ABC so very coarse language


----------



## Logique (3 September 2018)

That's great we have Sky News on free to air now. Won't have to endure continual one-sided commentary from the _latte lovies_.

"_Without agenda or bias.._" the ABC News says, which shows a risible lack of self-awareness . _Insiders_ on ABC Sunday mornings is a case in point.

For those in the 'Peoples Republic of Victoria', you might just check with the Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan, that you're not committing a thought crime by  watching Sky News


----------



## PZ99 (3 September 2018)

Can you get Sky News there? I thought it was only in NSW via the WIN network.


----------



## boofhead (4 September 2018)

It's in other states via Win including Tasmania.


----------



## Logique (4 September 2018)

boofhead said:


> It's in other states via Win including Tasmania.



I'm getting it via WIN in NSW. Some people may have to retune their tv to get it on the claimed Ch83


----------



## CanOz (5 September 2018)

Is there a neutral alternative to the ABC? I'm tired of the right wing slant...it's worn me out. I'm happy with my Twitter feed but I like Australian news too...any free alternative?


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2018)

CanOz said:


> Is there a neutral alternative to the ABC? I'm tired of the _*right wing *_slant...it's worn me out. I'm happy with my Twitter feed but I like Australian news too...any free alternative?




The ABC is Right wing biased now ?

Who'da thunk it ? 

I'm actually getting a bit sick of the social whingers on the ABC. The Muslim's, LGB's,  indigenous and women all screaming about discrimination and dirty deeds done by straight white males, it's getting very tiring.

They need to get back into the mainstream and the basics of modern life.


----------



## CanOz (5 September 2018)

Oops left wing...


----------



## Logique (5 September 2018)

Cheers CanOz. ABC right wing?  Quick, somebody contact David Marr, Emma Alberici, Ellen Fanning, Laura Tingle, Tony Jones, Virginia Trioli, Fran Kelly ... as these presenters would never stand for any biased coverage


----------



## CanOz (5 September 2018)

Always get left wing and right wing mixed up...about like my driving


----------



## PZ99 (5 September 2018)

CanOz said:


> Always get left wing and right wing mixed up...about like my driving



One is the feel-good home run, the other pays the bills


----------



## sptrawler (5 September 2018)

I think with Morrison in, the ABC will pull its head in. 
I would guess, he will go head to head with their left wing head bangers, and see how they fare.
Just my guess, but I reckon he will tear them another nether region, in a head on debate.
Time will tell.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I think with Morrison in, the ABC will pull its head in.
> I would guess, he will go head to head with their left wing head bangers, and see how they fare.
> Just my guess, but I reckon he will tear them another nether region, in a head on debate.
> Time will tell.




No, he's full of bull and bluster no matter how cuddly he pretends to be. 

He'll suck up to the media but I think the electorate will work him out.


----------



## sptrawler (5 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> No, he's full of bull and bluster no matter how cuddly he pretends to be.
> 
> He'll suck up to the media but I think the electorate will work him out.




You as I do, hope.  We will see what transpires.

One thing for sure, Turnbull gone is a big plus for the Libs.


----------



## Tisme (6 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I think with Morrison in, the ABC will pull its head in.
> I would guess, he will go head to head with their left wing head bangers, and see how they fare.
> Just my guess, but I reckon he will tear them another nether region, in a head on debate.
> Time will tell.




My take on the ABC is that it is a nation state that has gravitated into a social apartheid system where you only get a job if you think or voice like a 1960's protest university student.

The humour is nearly always university sarcasm, the social justice is always presented by a women reporter and skewed to women being under the heel of men, or based on justice for non white skin colour, non christian religions, aberrant sexual lifestyle choices, obese women,  etc.

If it wasn't for old skool programmes like 4 Corners and the woeful juvenility of the commercial stations,  it would be exposed for the organisation of arrested development individuals it is. They need to get rid of their cheesecloth, tie dyes, little red books and grow up IMO.


----------



## Darc Knight (6 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC is Right wing biased now ?
> 
> Who'da thunk it ?
> 
> ...




During my brief stints listening to the ABC I've found this as well.
I find ABC News and Current Affairs to be balanced but the segments on minority issues is too overwhelming. I understand it's to give everyone a voice but it turns a lot of people off (and over to commercial channels).


----------



## macca (6 September 2018)

I think the ABC was originally meant to be a way for the government to contact and inform the population of Australia of new laws and provide information generally to everyone, no matter where they lived.

I think to do that we need one TV channel, one radio station and in today's world, one website.

If we close down all the rest of the ABC we could save a fortune


----------



## PZ99 (6 September 2018)

macca said:


> I think the ABC was originally meant to be a way for the government to contact and inform the population of Australia of new laws and provide information generally to everyone, no matter where they lived.
> 
> I think to do that we need one TV channel, one radio station and in today's world, one website.
> 
> If we close down all the rest of the ABC we could save a fortune



I agree with you about the radio. I mentioned some time back they did a radio survey in rural Victoria and there were 2 stations with virtually no listeners. So you can save some beer money by consolidating those but more importantly, you can save some real coin from then leasing out the unused RF spectrum to a commercial operator nationwide.


----------



## dutchie (6 September 2018)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-abc-staff-bemused-by-utopia-like-larry-cards

Obviously ABC staff have not graduated from Play School yet.


----------



## Logique (6 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> No, he's full of bull and bluster no matter how cuddly he pretends to be.
> He'll suck up to the media but I think the electorate will work him out.



Paul Keating would have a field day in Question Time with this current crop of Libs.
 "..All tip and no iceberg" was a Keating-ism


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

Here is a typical problem with the ABC. Three articles on their website.
The public is getting sick of the media, but trust what journalists have to say.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...new-workplace-skill/10209210?section=analysis

We now spend more than we earn.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...than-than-they-earn/10214552?section=analysis

Guess what we spend a lot on?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-10/chart-of-the-day-how-aussies-lost-24-billion/10139778
The only other consumer growth industry, from what I've read, is fast junk food.

Why don't the Journalists join articles together? and say hey we are spending more than we earn and a lot is on gambling, cigarettes, alcohol and junk food.

Why do they report it as if everyone has tightened their belt, to the point of passing out, jeez it really is a sad state of affairs.
They try and paint it as Rwanda, or a third World Country where people don't have welfare or money, it actually is a sad indictment, of our society. IMO


----------



## Tisme (11 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Here is a typical problem with the ABC. Three articles on their website.
> The public is getting sick of the media, but trust what journalists have to say.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-10/fact-checking-the-new-workplace-skill/10209210?section=analysis
> 
> ...




I think it's more to do with the abilities of the "journalists" themselves.

The ABC is like a hive, with natural literary ability displaced by university drones who pray to the same chapter and verse. Of course that is true of a wider community too, a malaise that has infected many who have a need to belong to farcical mind altering movements (eg Greens, Guardian, LGBTxyz...), any movement that dismisses individual talent and opinions in favour of group hugs and stepford wife humdrum lives.


----------



## sptrawler (17 September 2018)

Well Tisme, I looked on the ABC website today, and find this article.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...ws-liberals-gender-problem-continues/10248138

They have a big problem with the obvious gender bias, in the Liberal Party.

They have a obsession with the ugliness of the Liberal Party leadership change.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-15/laura-tingle-giving-leadership-a-bad-name/10248748

They note a high profile candidate is taking on the Liberals, in the Wentworth by election.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...-kerryn-phelps-to-run-as-independent/10247658

There was a couple of other negative articles, one about women quotas, the only political news is about the Libs.

Not a peep about Labor, we are 8 months out from an election, you would think they would rate some mention.
For example Bill made a personal appearance at the Alcoa picket line, the strike has been going on for 5 weeks, he gave the guys his support.
You would think the ABC could ask him, to sort it out, Bob Hawke would have. lol


----------



## Tisme (17 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Well Tisme, I looked on the ABC website today, and find this article.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...ws-liberals-gender-problem-continues/10248138
> 
> ...




I have a feeling that Scott will sidle up with the ABC over the next period in a bid to sell the party's appeal. As a consequence, it will be interesting to see how much the bleed from Australia's social engineering nursery will be.


----------



## Darc Knight (18 September 2018)

Got sick of Alan Jones this morning so turned back to ABC Radio. Once the News and Current Affairs came on it was like a breath of fresh air - balanced!


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Got sick of Alan Jones this morning so turned back to ABC Radio. Once the News and Current Affairs came on it was like a breath of fresh air - balanced!




Got sick of listening to Morrison on ABC TV this morning, so turned the sound off.


----------



## Darc Knight (18 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Got sick of listening to Morrison on ABC TV this morning, so turned the sound off.




You might be ahead of the curve Sir. Jones is a fan of Morrison atm. Not a good sign


----------



## IFocus (18 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Got sick of Alan Jones this morning so turned back to ABC Radio. Once the News and Current Affairs came on it was like a breath of fresh air - balanced!




Gee fancy abandoning a bloke that just got done for vexations behavior verses  Australia's most trusted news source.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 September 2018)

Michelle Guthrie "resigns" as Managing Director of the ABC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/michelle-guthrie-leaves-as-md-of-the-abc/10297608


----------



## Tisme (24 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Michelle Guthrie "resigns" as Managing Director of the ABC.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/michelle-guthrie-leaves-as-md-of-the-abc/10297608




So it begins.


----------



## sptrawler (24 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Michelle Guthrie "resigns" as Managing Director of the ABC.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/michelle-guthrie-leaves-as-md-of-the-abc/10297608



It didn't sound as though she resigned, thought I read she was given the heave ho, must have done something right.


----------



## sptrawler (24 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It didn't sound as though she resigned, thought I read she was given the heave ho, must have done something right.



This guy seems to have hit the nail on the head, regarding her sacking, well my other half thinks so.lol

https://www.theage.com.au/entertain...e-guthrie-ever-do-for-us-20180924-p505p6.html

The missus loved 'Dr Blake mysteries', it was rating well and then dumped. Considering the wife isn't interested in anything at all, in any way political, it meant she now doesn't watch the ABC. Just reads bloody books, one after another, does my head in.
Anyway getting back to the story, it appears the MD was trying to attract a younger audience, to the ABC.
I reckon this quote from his article, was priceless.

_In short, Guthrie was right to see the need for the ABC to engage a younger audience, and right to embrace the digital platforms she knows so well in a bid to reach them. But she was misguided in disregarding the concerns, needs and likes of its existing audience in chasing the chimera of this new one.

Audience renewal is a challenge for all legacy media. But throwing the baby boomer out with the bathwater is not the way to achieve it._


----------



## Tisme (24 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> This guy seems to have hit the nail on the head, regarding her sacking, well my other half thinks so.lol
> 
> https://www.theage.com.au/entertain...e-guthrie-ever-do-for-us-20180924-p505p6.html
> 
> ...




She didn't agree with the vision for Project Jetstream ...odd for someone previously immersed in tech delivery.


----------



## sptrawler (24 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> She didn't agree with the vision for Project Jetstream ...odd for someone previously immersed in tech delivery.




I just think it is a sign of the times Tisme, we as 'baby boomers' have worked our usefull life, and today's society is throw away.
We become irrelevant and invisible, that's why talking about how hard it was means nothing today, the reset button has been pushed.
We are now there to be 'pumped, primed', untill we cough up anything of value, when that has been spent they will leave us alone, and start looking at themselves that won't end well.


----------



## Tisme (25 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I just think it is a sign of the times Tisme, we as 'baby boomers' have worked our usefull life, and today's society is throw away.
> We become irrelevant and invisible, that's why talking about how hard it was means nothing today, the reset button has been pushed.
> We are now there to be 'pumped, primed', untill we cough up anything of value, when that has been spent they will leave us alone, and start looking at themselves that won't end well.




You're a hard man to disagree with sometimes and this one of those occasions. I thought I was the poster boy for hedonism, but the current opinion leadership group have taken that to a new DILLIGAF level.


----------



## Darc Knight (25 September 2018)

Hopefully the ABC loses some of the LGBT, Feminism etc segments and focuses on what it does best: news and current affairs.


----------



## Tisme (25 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Hopefully the ABC loses some of the LGBT, Feminism etc segments and focuses on what it does best: news and current affairs.




Agreed, more representative of the demographic that pays its bills. Give up all the social engineering and gender bu11shit

Can you imagine the spears Guthrie is going skewer the ABC with: female, race, gender, religion, etc .... ABC hoisted by its own petard.


----------



## sptrawler (26 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> Agreed, more representative of the demographic that pays its bills. Give up all the social engineering and gender bu11shit
> .




It doesn't appear that is going to happen.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...our-most-precious-asset-gaven-morris/10308744

Independence isn't their most precious asset, impartiality is, that is the root cause of their problem they think they can take sides. IMO
They can't take sides, they are paid for by all sides of political persuasions, they can't decide which is the 'right' argument, they must present them all equally.
If the presenter can't do that, they should buy a tambourine, then go and beat it at their own expense not the taxpayers.


----------



## sptrawler (26 September 2018)

Well it looks as though that Milne bloke, has put himself in the crosshairs. lol

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/progr...-triple-j-moving-date-of-hottest-100/10308214

What do the say, hell has no fury as a women scorned, I think journo's are pretty close.lol

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-26/calls-for-abc-chairman-justin-milne-to-leave/10306596


----------



## sptrawler (26 September 2018)

Now the left wing journo's have joined in the rant, what a hoot, how the Journo's decide what will and won't be broadcast.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...-s-tangled-corporate-web-20180926-p5061t.html
Just shows, what dirt they have stored away, for recalcitrant bosses. lol
Why wasn't that news last week?

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...ord-this-bloodied-season-20180926-p5063w.html

Yes the last thing you can do is intimidate the meek. 

Mike Nahan, found that out in W.A, to his peril.

Labor just has to hope, the tide doesn't turn. lol

Sounds to me like the journo's just need to spill their beans, and maybe get a big change over of directors, as they all seem to be conflicted in interest.
I really hope this all goes bang, it is about time, for a major shakeup.IMO


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

That Milne bloke looks like that Murdoch bloke. Acts like it too. Get rid of him.


----------



## overhang (27 September 2018)

Imagine the outrage from the right if it were a Labor politician and ABC chairman that conspired to have a journalist fired that wrote a piece critical of a Labor government policy.


----------



## Tisme (27 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It doesn't appear that is going to happen.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...our-most-precious-asset-gaven-morris/10308744
> 
> Independence isn't their most precious asset, impartiality is, that is the root cause of their problem they think they can take sides. IMO
> ...




If I had to put a cultural identity on the ABC I'd suggest it's stocked with university arts, drama and pantomine types.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 September 2018)

Why don't the commercial channels, networks, media get the scrutiny the ABC does? I guess because its tax payer funded, but still a bit of fairness please.


----------



## Tisme (27 September 2018)

How convenient that the ABC staff seem to have amnesia about the time when Mallah was the news and how Abbott intervened and why.

And while I usually enjoy Emma tearing  strips off her victims, she was shown by social media to have been less than diligent with the facts and bias earlier in the year.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 September 2018)

The ABC always put the government under more scrutiny than the Opposition because the government has the power to act, unlike the Opposition.

Hawke and Keating didn't like the ABC either, for the same reason. That's one of the downsides of being in government, if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen, right Concetta ?


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

Gorn...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-27/abc-chairman-justin-milne-resigns/10311472

Now they can find someone who's not the cousin of a brother of a partner of a friend with a surname of Farquhar or his mother


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

Or on the other hand, they could just let the Labor Party and the Greens run it, then there won't be any conflict.


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

I'm on board with that; move the ABC to the left and balance out the spectrum. Perfect solution.


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I'm on board with that; move the ABC to the left and balance out the spectrum. Perfect solution.




The email, sounded as though the board was aware of the obvious bias against the Government, and as was said there is no gaurantee  they will lose the next election.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but their charter say's they are meant to be non aligned.
I know that isn't a problem if they are leaning your way, but a big problem if they're not.
I personally would like to see the ABC flogged off, if they are going to take sides and skew reporting and I don't care if they are skewing it left or right.
That isn't what they are there for, and there is better things to spend taxpayers money on, than funding jobs for political activists. IMO


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

Well first of all I have no time for any social engineering they might be involved with. But this perception of bias against the Coalition is long, legendary and convenient when it has to be. 
EG: I didn't hear of any "bias" when the ABC reported the triumphs of the budgets last week.

My view is this: In the eyes of most people, the Govt overall has been performing poorly for 4+ years and any attempt by the media to accurately report that performance will be looked upon as bias by Coalition supporters. I frequently see elsewhere on the 'net the argument that says that every Coalition own goal reported on the ABC should be matched minute for minute by an anti ALP jibe - no matter how obscure or real it is - simply for the purpose of "equal treatment". 

And then there's this continual issue of funding. Apparently we taxpayers have the right to dictate the on-air content of zero bias on the ABC solely because we pay for it. OK, fine with me, but why limit that to the ABC? Why not all Govt funded organisations? Even the Govt itself? After all, last time I checked, it was Liberals biased against Liberals, Nationals against Nationals and the Govt hating itself so much it might as well be 75 different parties.
Acceptable it ain't - coz it's my tax money sponsoring this muppet show right?

And then there's reality. My view is this bias argument is a red herring when it all comes down to perspective. If the Govt doesn't want to be on the receiving end of negative bias (whether from the ABC or its own members) then they just need to pull their finger out, get real and do away with all this frivolity, white noise and small beer stuff.

As for selling the ABC, yeah I can agree with that. We'll save a billion a year which we can use to litigate against Murdoch for tax avoidance and save another billion every year as well.


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Well first of all I have no time for any social engineering they might be involved with. But this perception of bias against the Coalition is long, legendary and convenient when it has to be.
> EG: I didn't hear of any "bias" when the ABC reported the triumphs of the budgets last week.




Actually I will make this easy for you, show any negative report on the ABC, since Labor lost office five years ago.
A lot of their policy is very polarizing, therefore there should be some report that gives both sides, of their policies.
Can you post up anything?
I tell you what, to make it more even, for every negative ALP article you post, I will post two Negative Abbott articles. Do you want to have a side bet on the winner.
The ABC is there to give the facts, and a balanced view of politics, not the presenters political leanings.
There was a lot of places in Australia, that only received the ABC broadcast, so it was important that they were impartial.
With the advent of the internet, satellite transmission and wireless coverage. The requirement for the ABC becomes less tenuous, if they aren't supplying a balanced fair representation, they will be sold off. If not by the Libs, it will be by Labor, as Keating said "there is no longer a requirement for the Government to be involved in retail banking".
The same will apply to the ABC, if they aren't providing a non aligned service.


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Actually I will make this easy for you, show any negative report on the ABC, since Labor lost office five years ago.
> A lot of their policy is very polarizing, therefore there should be some report that gives both sides, of their policies.
> Can you post up anything?



Sure I can. But in exchange for what? This a trade forum, so let's trade 

Wanna show me an ABC report that is disproportionally pro Labor?


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Sure I can. But in exchange for what? This a trade forum, so let's trade
> 
> Wanna show me an ABC report that is disproportionally pro Labor?



That is exactly what I'm saying, they say nothing about Labor and its policies.
Which in reality could exacerbate an already shaky housing market, the election is in a maximum of eight months time.
If the current Labor policy of reducing capital gains to 25%, and limiting negative gearing is enacted, it could well cause a massive housing correction. IMO
If this isn't the case, I would love to hear labors reasoning, that will avoid it.
Obviously it isn't seen as anywhere near as big a problem, as someone saying Malcolm Turnbull asked for an ABC reporter to be sacked.
That took up about a weeks worth of ABC's time, yet today it isn't mentioned, because that Milne dude said no one asked me to sack anyone.
I can't understand why there is an ABC board, getting paid, fluck them off and let the reporters run it. It looks like they do anyway, so we would save a ton of money, better still like I said sell them they are a relic of the past.


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

Well feel free to indulge on these Shorten reports, but to be fair, it really should be a contest of Labor in Govt versus Liberal in Govt. Leadership changes, unstable Govt, bad policy, it's all there. You can't really compare a Govt against an opposition because they aren't the same identity.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-11/sam-dastyari-under-pressure-to-resign-from-within-labor-party/9245526

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...l-shorten-had-a-captains-fall-opinion/9922742

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-...-malcolm-turnbull-linked-to-vic-labor/9263578

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-30/bill-shorten-company-tax-election/9925112

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...abor-of-love-doesnt-extend-to-shorten/7458960

As for neg gearing, don't believe half of what you read and none of what you hear. They will back flip just as much as this Govt has, and the previous Govt and the one before that.


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

I was going to start and post anti Turnbull, anti Abbott, anti LNP posts.
But then I looked at the dates on your posts.
Like I said the current issue I want debated, and questioned is Labors policies, as they are a shoe in to get Government.
Your answer, don't worry about it, she'll be right. By any chance, would you be employed by them? 
I just want Tony Jones and Emma, to ask them the hard questions, it would be nice.
As for the ABC, just go to their webpage, every morning. I do
Just out of interest I just went over to their webpage.
Apparently at the moment, we have the most job vacancies listed in the last 10 years, it isn't up on the page, yet it is a fairly important milestone one would think.
My appologies, it is the highest job vacancies, since records were started. lol
Not a mention on the ABC, too busy, running the business. lol
But one could think, it might be seen as a positive for the Government, so they didn't run it. Or I missed it.
https://thewest.com.au/business/eco...ncies-hit-record-high-of-236700-ng-b88973941z

Maybe that example is a bit too current, after all, it is the ABC.


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I was going to start and post anti Turnbull, anti Abbott, anti LNP posts.
> But then I looked at the dates on your posts.
> Like I said the current issue I want debated, and questioned is Labors policies, as they are a shoe in to get Government.
> Your answer, don't worry about it, she'll be right. By any chance, would you be employed by them?
> I just want Tony Jones and Emma, to ask them the hard questions, it would be nice.



As a matter of fact, I said last week that the current softening of the housing market might force the ALP to back down their neg gearing policy so, no, I didn't say "she'll be right" - that's an invention of yours - very much akin to what the Liberal Party does - by any chance, would you be employed by them?

And your original challenge - which I met - wasn't limited to neg gearing policy. It was quote "since Labor lost office five years ago." We can't nefariously change the goalposts


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> As a matter of fact, I said last week that the current softening of the housing market might force the ALP to back down their neg gearing policy so, no, I didn't say "she'll be right" - that's an invention of yours - very much akin to what the Liberal Party does - by any chance, would you be employed by them?
> 
> And your original challenge - which I met - wasn't limited to neg gearing policy. It was quote "since Labor lost office five years ago." We can't nefariously change the goalposts



If you read below, I added a current issue, actually as of today.


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

OK so let's be clear on this... You want me to post ABC articles that are critical about Labor's negative gearing policies - excluding articles from 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 ?


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> As a matter of fact, I said last week that the current softening of the housing market might force the ALP to back down their neg gearing policy so, no, I didn't say "she'll be right" - that's an invention of yours - very much akin to what the Liberal Party does - by any chance, would you be employed by them?




My question was, why aren't Tony Jones and Emma asking the Labor Party about their stance on negative gearing and Capital gains, who gives a $hit what you posted last week.
The thread is about ABC bias, not whether you think the labor Party might be forced to back down, it isn't about you.


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> OK so let's be clear on this... You want me to post ABC articles that are critical about Labor's negative gearing policies - excluding articles from 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 ?



Well let's be more specific, I located some good news for the Government today, why didn't the ABC share it with us?

https://thewest.com.au/business/eco...ncies-hit-record-high-of-236700-ng-b88973941z


----------



## PZ99 (27 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> My question was, why aren't Tony Jones and Emma asking the Labor Party about their stance on negative gearing and Capital gains, who gives a $hit what you posted last week.
> The thread is about ABC bias, not whether you think the labor Party might be forced to back down, it isn't about you.



Exactly, it isn't about me. But that doesn't mean I can't respond to your assertion...


sptrawler said:


> Your answer, don't worry about it, she'll be right. By any chance, would you be employed by them?


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Exactly, it isn't about me. But that doesn't mean I can't respond to your assertion...



O.K so now you are over the pedantic's, what about the current issue of job vacancy adverts?
https://thewest.com.au/business/eco...ncies-hit-record-high-of-236700-ng-b88973941z
That isn't mentioned on the ABC.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> O.K so now you are over the pedantic's, what about the current issue of job vacancy adverts?
> https://thewest.com.au/business/eco...ncies-hit-record-high-of-236700-ng-b88973941z
> That isn't mentioned on the ABC.



That doesn't mean they are biased against the Coalition. Pedantic much? Their last article on jobs was just facts and figures - exactly as it should be reported.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-13/jobs-boom-rolls-on-as-unemployment-stays-steady/10240940


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Exactly, it isn't about me. But that doesn't mean I can't respond to your assertion...



By the way that was nasty, cutting and pasting from two of my posts, to try and justify your response.
That is actually what you bag other people for, it is called a lack of integrity.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> That doesn't mean they are biased against the Coalition. Pedantic much? Their last article on jobs was just facts and figures - exactly as it should be reported.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-13/jobs-boom-rolls-on-as-unemployment-stays-steady/10240940




After your post 2905, I'm over it, obviously this is your job.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> By the way that was nasty, cutting and pasting from two of my posts, to try and justify your response.
> That is actually what you bag other people for, it is called a lack of integrity.



Lack of integrity is your attempt to throw around false assertions about what I do or don't support. Your opinion of how I respond to it is worthless to me.

Now are you going to post those anti Govt posts x 2 as promised or would you like me to do it?


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Why don't you go down to your post 2905, and quote exactly as it should be reported.
> Mate you're full of it.



That says more about you than me. As you said, the thread's not about me. 

Your personal attacks are making you look grossly stupid.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

Like I said, you failed to answer why Tony Jones and Emma don't ask the questions of labors policies, when we as taxpayers deserve that consideration.
like I said, I'm over it, there is nothing I can do or say that will change anything.
I would just like to have a honest discussion about it, that obviously isn't possible, so i just go back into my hole and burrow on. lol


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Like I said, you failed to answer why Tony Jones and Emma don't ask the questions of labors policies, when we as taxpayers deserve that consideration.



http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/039-2016/

I'm not going to stuff around with Emma anymore than you are with your broken promise to post those anti Abbott et-el articles which now stands at ten according to your unstable rules. Seems to me you failed your own challenge. Paddle your own boat. That's the Conservative way.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/039-2016/
> 
> I'm not going to stuff around with Emma anymore than you are with your broken promise to post those anti Abbott et-el articles which now stands at ten according to your unstable rules. Seems to me you failed your own challenge. Paddle your own boat. That's the Conservative way.



Do you realise that post, was 2015? WTF has that got to do with current policy?
If you want to google Tony Abbott news ABC, it is endless.
Tomorrow we can start a collection of LNP and ALP posts, by the ABC. It should be interesting.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Do you realise that post, was 2015? WTF has that got to do with current policy?
> If you want to google Tony Abbott news ABC, it is endless.
> Tomorrow we can start a collection of LNP and ALP posts, by the ABC. It should be interesting.



Do you realise that post, was 2016?

Who cares when the post was made? WTF has that got to do with current policy? Everything.
It's relevant to their current neg gearing policy.
Nothing has changed other than a leadership change in the Govt.

Tony Abbott? http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-24/dutton-and-abbott-congratulate-scott-morrison/10161204


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2018)

> As for selling the ABC, yeah I can agree with that. We'll save a billion a year which we can use to litigate against Murdoch for tax avoidance and save another billion every year as well.




Sell off the ABC and you get another NewsCorp. One of the most biased news organisations in the world, zero investigative journalism, trite rubbish like the Daily Telegraph, and admitted misbehaviour like the bugging fiasco in the UK.

The government just spent 4 times the ABC's budget mollifying Catholic schools, and half their budget to a Save the Reef corporation consisting of their mates. Selling off the ABC could well be an election issue and one that may well sink the Coalition if it hasn't already been sunk.

If Murdoch is avoiding tax , then go after him and give the proceeds to the ABC. LOL



> Tomorrow we can start a collection of LNP and ALP posts, by the ABC. It should be interesting.




As I said before, the government whether Lib or Lab always gets more criticism from the ABC, as it should be as the government are the ones allegedly running the country and spending the money.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Sell off the ABC and you get another NewsCorp. One of the most biased news organisations in the world, zero investigative journalism, trite rubbish like the Daily Telegraph, and admitted misbehaviour like the bugging fiasco in the UK.
> 
> The government just spent 4 times the ABC's budget mollifying Catholic schools, and half their budget to a Save the Reef corporation consisting of their mates. Selling off the ABC could well be an election issue and one that may well sink the Coalition if it hasn't already been sunk.
> 
> ...



The Coalition and their supporters won't be happy until the ABC really does become another NewsCorp. Then they'll flog it off for a fraction of its previous value due to the attributes you've listed. You know Murdoch Media is worthless when they ask you to pay to read their articles online and yet some are dumb enuff to subscribe because it merely confirms their prejudices.

ooh lookie - more anti Labor bias from the ABC... the bastards > http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-27/nsw-labor-questions-political-future-of-pregnant-mp/10314150


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Do you realise that post, was 2016?
> 
> Who cares when the post was made? WTF has that got to do with current policy? Everything.
> It's relevant to their current neg gearing policy.
> ...



WE are talking about why the ABC, doesn't question them on the policy, why is this so hard.
All I'm saying, is they don't ask anything of the Labor Party and their policies, and an election is due soon.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2018)

FFS I'll let it go, a dose of reality is what is needed.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> WE are talking about why the ABC, doesn't question them on the policy, why is this so hard.
> All I'm saying, is they don't ask anything of the Labor Party and their policies, and an election is due soon.



I just found an article two articles on the ABC, one with at least 3 polices - including neg gearing - from about 3 and 4 weeks ago. Nothing has changed since then.


----------



## Darc Knight (28 September 2018)

Imagine a Land where all the Media is controlled by big business. We'd have a Media akin to the State run propoganda networks of China and North Korea, albeit on the other end of the spectrum. Imagine the change in Australia then. Imagine the next generation being brainwashed.

The ABC needs to improve but it needs to remain independent and it's funding guaranteed.


----------



## overhang (28 September 2018)

I feel like this is part of the problem that adds to peoples perception of bias, the government of the day is always going to draw more media attention than the opposition, after all they are the ones that by and large implement policy in this country.  It's not the norm for oppositions outside of election cycles to outline their policy platform, so one would expect that outside of election periods the government of the day is going to be under a greater microscope than the opposition.  The last 22 years has seen the coalition govern for 16 of those, naturally they are going to receive a greater coverage than the opposition and thus the perception of bias is there.  Perhaps if someone can prove that during 2007-2013 the Libs had more coverage critical of their policies than Labor did then they would have a point but I very much doubt that to be the case.

As for selling off the ABC and being left to media organisations with no charter that requires them to remain impartial, well it's a long way down that rabbit hole, the result is media like Fox news in the US this week that actually edited out the laughter at Donald Trump during his speech to UN world leaders.  I guess some might find this their utopian society.


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

Agreed. The Govt will always face more scrutiny than the opposition.

The reason (in my view) why the ABC well never be sold off is because it simply isn't worth a million dollars a year to operate.

No one will buy it unless a> Someone like Murdoch wants it to smother it and b> the media laws allow such evil to eventuate 

If we did manage to sell it we could probably start up another media for a fraction of the cost.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> The reason (in my view) why the ABC well never be sold off is because it simply isn't worth a million dollars a year to operate.




That's actually a* billion. *


----------



## PZ99 (28 September 2018)

My bad - a billion. Gotta love that inflation


----------



## Logique (28 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> ... Imagine the *next generation being brainwashed*... The ABC needs to improve but it needs to remain independent and it's funding guaranteed.



It's not something we need to imagine, any school kid will tell you AGW is an established fact, and stop being a 'denier'. And then there are the gender whisperers messing with the poor little kids heads.  

And recently a nine year old very publicly refusing to stand for the national anthem, admittedly not the school's fault in this particular instance.

The ABC is 'Pravda', a swamp that needs to be drained (regional radio apart, which is invaluable).


----------



## Darc Knight (28 September 2018)

Logique said:


> It's not something we need to imagine, any school kid will tell you AGW is an established fact, and stop being a 'denier'. And recently a nine year old very publicly refusing to stand for the national anthem, admittedly not the school's fault in this particular instance.
> 
> The ABC is 'Pravda', a swamp that needs to be drained (regional radio apart, which is invaluable).




I thought Schools taught Science. Science via Scientists have determined Global Warming is occurring, thus it is taught in School.

As for some kid not standing for the National Anthem, I fail to see how the ABC is responsible for that.

ABC needs to remain Independent and have its funding guaranteed or we go further down the path of inequality like the U.S. due to too much commercial propoganda.


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> I thought Schools taught Science. Science via Scientists have determined Global Warming is occurring, thus it is taught in School.
> 
> As for some kid not standing for the National Anthem, I fail to see how the ABC is responsible for that.
> 
> ABC needs to remain Independent and have its funding guaranteed or we go further down the path of inequality like the U.S. due to too much commercial propoganda.



Many scientists have a more nuanced view of cc,  according to the science.

Also,  if we look at the gender theory taught in schools,  it directly contradicts what is solid science. 

Pulleeze,  lets not cite the education system as any competent arbiter of science,  that is objectively false.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2018)

Another excellent article by Laura Tingle on the ABC fiasco.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-...more-in-common-than-they-might-think/10318720

--


----------



## Darc Knight (29 September 2018)

That just made me realise, ScoMo came out saying he supports a strong ABC, last week I think.
This week Steve Price filling in for Alan Jones seemed to return to the old tactic of attacking ScoMo. They were giving ScoMo a chance prior to this.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> That just made me realise, ScoMo came out saying he supports a strong ABC, last week I think.
> This week Steve Price filling in for Alan Jones seemed to return to the old tactic of attacking ScoMo. They were giving ScoMo a chance prior to this.




Yes, all the commercial media hate the ABC. The ABC are eating their lunch as Murdoch once said.


----------



## Logique (29 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> I thought Schools taught Science. *Science via Scientists have determined Global Warming is occurring*, thus it is *taught in School*.
> As for some kid not standing for the National Anthem, I fail to see how the ABC is responsible for that.
> ABC needs to remain Independent and have its funding guaranteed or we go further down the path of inequality like the U.S. due to too much commercial propoganda.



My point is that not a single peer reviewed scientific paper definitively proves Anthropogenic GW. As distinct from the background low level inter-glacial period warming. Spoon fed politicized science to frighten the poor little kids.

As for the ABC, just hire a few conservatives, it's not rocket science. Hire one conservative even.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2018)

Logique said:


> As for the ABC, just hire a few conservatives, it's not rocket science. Hire one conservative even.




They did, but he went to Channel 9.


----------



## PZ99 (29 September 2018)

Logique said:


> As for the ABC, just hire a few conservatives, it's not rocket science. Hire one conservative even.



Yeah... I can agree with that. Put the Bolt report, the Peta Credilin show and the Alan Jones show on a few nights during the week. Of course, they'll all decline such an offer because there's no real money there


----------



## Darc Knight (29 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Yeah... I can agree with that. Put the Bolt report, the Peta Credilin show and the Alan Jones show on a few nights during the week. Of course, they'll all decline such an offer because there's no real money there




You saying Andrew Bolt, Credlin and Jones should be educating the next generation?


----------



## Tisme (30 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> You saying Andrew Bolt, Credlin and Jones should be educating the next generation?




If you are suggesting the ABC grooms generations, then it is very important Bolt/Credlin/Jones have their countervailing views put too. 

Even more important is that the ABC be sterilised so that it doesn't keep pushing the socialist agenda that it patently does. A good start would be:

include unaligned hetero opinionated males on the Drum;
include unaligned hetero opinionated males on QANDA;
cleanup the matrilineal practice of appointing anchor presenters;
start reporting news without having a gaggle tear it apart in subsequent programs, just report the news more;
bring back Lateline its Kerry O'Brien format;
stop producing and flooding the calendar with fringe dweller programs that promote diminution of the nuclear family and christian values (not necessarily the religious brand);

in short we need the ABC to go back to being an Aunty who doesn't stick her nose into her relative's family affairs.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> A good start would be:




Appoint a Board that is broadly representative of the population and and MD who has some knowledge of the business and what the public want and need.


----------



## PZ99 (30 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> You saying Andrew Bolt, Credlin and Jones should be educating the next generation?



The next generation won't be watching the ABC - they'll be immersed in the fifth estate and all the conspiracy theories that come with it. Same goes for the Joneses. The only people that listen to Alan Jones are the over 60's - like everything else in media, Jonestown has a dusty dead end.


----------



## Tisme (1 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Appoint a Board that is broadly representative of the population and and MD who has some knowledge of the business and what the public want and need.




do you remember how they censored our contributions? The big change happened around that time.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 October 2018)

Tisme said:


> do you remember how they censored our contributions? The big change happened around that time.




Yes, and they used to have reader comments on online news stories and those have now disappeared.

Too hard for them to moderate was the reason, which indicates that the funding is being squeezed.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 October 2018)

Tisme said:


> If you are suggesting the ABC grooms generations, then it is very important Bolt/Credlin/Jones have their countervailing views put too.




Then shouldn't the ABC be demanding equal time on the Ray Hadley, Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones shows ?

The people you mentioned don't need their views put on the ABC, they already have their own megaphones.


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Then shouldn't the ABC be demanding equal time on the Ray Hadley, Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones shows ?
> 
> The people you mentioned don't need their views put on the ABC, they already have their own megaphones.



I was impressed they gave Jonathan Haidt a fair hearing the other day, although he is center left, he is considered an apostate by the post modernists for giving the SJWs a rev up. 

I was quite surprised


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Then shouldn't the ABC be demanding equal time on the Ray Hadley, Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones shows ?
> 
> The people you mentioned don't need their views put on the ABC, they already have their own megaphones.



....and although auntie shouldnt necessarily give the 2gb line up a run,  they really should allow some reasonable and equal access to conservative and classical liberal voices, as a state broadcaster


----------



## SirRumpole (1 October 2018)

wayneL said:


> ....and although auntie shouldnt necessarily give the 2gb line up a run,  they really should allow some reasonable and equal access to conservative and classical liberal voices, as a state broadcaster




Sure, they interview Coalition politicians all the time.


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure, they interview Coalition politicians all the time.



The coalition is not currently conservative,  nor classically liberal.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 October 2018)

The ABC just cut a Shorten interview because Morrison started one.

How political is that ?


----------



## PZ99 (5 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC just cut a Shorten interview because Morrison started one.
> 
> How political is that ?



Nice tactic. 

As soon as Shorten's on the telly ScoMo gets his backside outside and presses his releases..

Wicked


----------



## Tisme (16 October 2018)

I hour into News Breakfast this morning and so far quite a few faces, but the only man face is Michael's. Having said that Lara, presenting the weather, is quite soothing on the eye. There was one female that did its best to look like  a bedraggled bloke.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 October 2018)

Tisme said:


> I hour into News Breakfast this morning and so far quite a few faces, but the only man face is Michael's. Having said that Lara, presenting the weather, is quite soothing on the eye. There was one female that did its best to look like  a bedraggled bloke.




I suppose we should be grateful for one these days to quieten the frivolous chatter.


----------



## Tisme (16 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I suppose we should be grateful for one these days to quieten the frivolous chatter.




near an hour and a half now and the hens are still at recalcitrant rooster Michael over the preggers princess. Still a no show male event.

Reprising yesterday:


----------



## sptrawler (16 October 2018)

Tisme said:


> near an hour and a half now and the hens are still at recalcitrant rooster Michael over the preggers princess. Still a no show male event.




The males are probably out the back in makeup, chasing and groping all the girls, security probably has their hands full and the tactical response group is getting kitted up.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 October 2018)

The other night Steve Price and Andrew Bolt started discussing these pipe bombs sent to critics of Trump. Straight away Price and Bolt startsd accusing the Democrats of sending the Bombs. Nothing about a possible deranged Trump fan boy sending them or Trump's inflamatory language being a possible cause. Then Price launched into critism of CNN. Bolt then challenged Price "why were you watching CNN?". Price replied "coz it's right there next to Fox News on the remote".
Says it all doesn't it.


----------



## Logique (27 October 2018)

Any comment DN on Democrats De Niro and Biden threatening to punch Trump on the nose. 

Let's not have double standards


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2018)

Yeah...


----------



## SirRumpole (27 October 2018)

Everyone in the US is unhinged, they are all a bunch of loonies.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 October 2018)

Logique said:


> Any comment DN on Democrats De Niro and Biden threatening to punch Trump on the nose.
> 
> Let's not have double standards




Neither De Niro nor Biden threatened to punch Trump, they said they'd like to.
Trump's an habitual liar, his deranged fan boys aren't far off too


----------



## explod (27 October 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Everyone in the US is unhinged, they are all a bunch of loonies.



They the people of the US have God so all good Sir Rump.

God = the "Witch Doctor" for the "Chief" Rothschild's, Morgan's et al, Illuminati.


----------



## sileverback (27 October 2018)

belatedly for what its worth ...
The ABC and SBS are the only credible news agencies in the country. If u disagree and depend on/treat  Rupert and his reptiles as credible, rather than mythologists operating in an ultraKKKon framework, look up the meaning of "critical thinking" in the dictionary and attempt a transition to the real world.


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Neither De Niro nor Biden threatened to punch Trump, they said they'd like to.
> Trump's an habitual liar, his deranged fan boys aren't far off too



Leftists just can't troll with any believeability. Sorry DK,  invoking light weight,  low IQ  tossers just doesn't hit the spot... You NPCs only get laughs from other NPCs when the NPC algorithm allows it. 

Take the red pill bro, if you wanna play in the big league.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 October 2018)

wayneL said:


> Leftists just can't troll with any believeability. Sorry DK,  invoking light weight,  low IQ  tossers just doesn't hit the spot... You NPCs only get laughs from other NPCs when the NPC algorithm allows it.
> 
> Take the red pill bro, if you wanna play in the big league.




The subject I was asked to comment on was DeNiro and Biden threatening to punch Trump. I stated that was false. They said they'd like to punch Trump. You've then gone into some deranged rant about God knows what. I think we know whose trolling.


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2018)

My scientific observations aren't trolling, all part of a study into how AI was inplanted into leftist brains and how it replaced the capacity for critical thinking with woke cultural vandalism. 

It is a marvel how "they" did that.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 October 2018)

wayneL said:


> My scientific observations aren't trolling, all part of a study into how AI was inplanted into leftist brains and how it replaced the capacity for critical thinking with woke cultural vandalism.
> 
> It is a marvel how "they" did that.




More of your "leftist leanings" I assume Wayne.


----------



## IFocus (27 October 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> More of your "leftist leanings" I assume Wayne.




LDS = Leftest Derangement Syndrome


----------



## wayneL (28 October 2018)

IFocus said:


> LDS = Leftest Derangement Syndrome



Agree, LeftIsts are deranged.


----------



## wayneL (28 October 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> More of your "leftist leanings" I assume Wayne.



I never said I was a Marxist,  or "leftist". Not on your life mate.  I said I probably lean *slightly left socially,  important difference.


----------



## orr (30 October 2018)

Never in my memory has the ABC  leftist bias been so furvently exposed as in the las tweeks; when I hear on the 'Backgound Breifing' wireless broardcast about some of a few good hearted 'boi's' of the nations soil being  Libaled and miscast as infiltrator's, plants and manipulators(correctly if truth be told) in the, now shown to be, lilly livered and stalinist worshipping National party.... Never has a more fitting  cultural meme applied than 'Sieg Seig Sputnik' than it does now.... Overly made up incoherent, fabulated dross. 
Give us Rup[ert or give us death(sort of the same thing).... I did luv those little skull and cross bones on the front of the caps, so 'touch and feely for the times.... But we were young then and now we are very old, Argentina has been a bit patchy, so to spreak'n but I diegreses .....


----------



## Logique (8 November 2018)

One or two ABC commentators who could use a similar wake up call!


----------



## SirRumpole (8 November 2018)

Logique said:


> One or two ABC commentators who could use a similar wake up call!






Yeah well, I think all the ABC reporters should line up to be crash tackled by Tony Abbott.


----------



## Logique (8 November 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah well, I think all the ABC reporters should line up to be crash tackled by Tony Abbott.



I think you meant shirt-fronted


----------



## Logique (21 November 2018)

'The Chaser' luvvies have run out of other peoples money. They're hopping mad at Aunty







> The ABC is 'in a death spiral': *The Chaser launches war on Aunty*
> By Robert Moran & Nathanael Cooper, 20 November 2018
> https://www.smh.com.au/entertainmen...er-launches-war-on-aunty-20181120-p50h44.html
> ...The group made a surprise announcement on Twitter on Monday, revealing the ABC, its home since 1999, had "declined to fund" an election year series for 2019...


----------



## Logique (28 February 2019)

Ita Buttrose appointed as new ABC Chair. Looks like a steady as she goes appointment to me. Especially if you saw Ita in action on the Ch10 mornings program in recent times. 

The ABC is run by the staff and will continue to be.


----------



## Darc Knight (1 March 2019)

Logique said:


> Ita Buttrose appointed as new ABC Chair. Looks like a steady as she goes appointment to me. Especially if you saw Ita in action on the Ch10 mornings program in recent times.
> 
> The ABC is run by the staff and will continue to be.


----------



## qldfrog (28 March 2019)

Another proof if need be of how you can introduce bias
Real figures twisted presentation
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...in-2018-according-to-iea/10941378?pfmredir=sm
I quote 

China, India and the US account for 85pc of the increase in emissions
From the very same report

In the United States, the emission reductions seen in 2017 were reversed, with an increase of 3.1% in CO2 emissions in 2018. Despite this increase, emissions in the United States remain around their 1990 levels, 14% and 800 Mt of CO2 below their peak in 2000
Now if we check where these emissions come from in 2018
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...arbon-emissions-jump-to-all-time-high-in-2018
Yes from the guardian, so i summarise eu and usa have drastically reduced their emission in the last 20y,asia especially india and china are going like there is no tomorrow..there may not be indeed
Abc stop giving us ideologies, give us facts


----------



## DB008 (8 May 2019)

I'm sure it can't be me, but has anyone else noticed that the ABC is bashing anyone that is :
White
Hetrosexual
Christian
Anyone who isn't a Labour/Greens voter


Call me crazy, but I've certainly noticed a trend lately on the ABC, mainly in their opinion section. It's like they have employed a lot of 'fresh out of uni' or 'SJW's' talent....

I thought that the ABC had a mandate to be neutral in their reporting? So much for that.


Check out this one...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05...g-yassmined-free-speech-in-australia/11054020


----------



## Knobby22 (8 May 2019)

I listened to that talk. It was quite good. Worth a listen.
Features an interview with Andrew Bolt who argued his case well.


----------



## wayneL (9 May 2019)

DB008 said:


> I'm sure it can't be me, but has anyone else noticed that the ABC is bashing anyone that is :
> White
> Hetrosexual
> Christian
> ...




In general,  a year ago let's say,  I thought Aunty was doing a good job of pretending to be neutral. 

Lately,  I find them overtly and openly in favour of the Labor/Green axis,  to the point that they are referring to the axis of evil as "we" in many cases.


----------



## rederob (9 May 2019)

wayneL said:


> Lately,  I find them overtly and openly in favour of the Labor/Green axis,  to the point that they are referring to the axis of evil as "we" in many cases.



For example, one case please.


----------



## basilio (9 May 2019)

DB008 said:


> I'm sure it can't be me, but has anyone else noticed that the ABC is bashing anyone that is :
> White
> Hetrosexual
> Christian
> ...




Hmm.  I thought this story was particularly good at showing how Yasmin was basically run out of Australia by the feral right (Bolt, Devine, The Murdoch Press) for a single  quite mild comment and how this experience certainly makes anyone other non white, non Christian,  person think veeerrry carefully about crossing the paths of the feral right.

And DB thinks the ABC shouln't talk about this ? Perhaps just leave Yasmin swinging in the breeze as a reminder to any other would be apple cart kicker.


----------



## Logique (20 May 2019)

Election result May 2019:

Australia 1 - Ultimo 0


----------



## sileverback (20 May 2019)

The thread title captured my attention.
In truth the only credible news service in australia is the ABC. If you know what investigative journalism really means rely on Four Corners , 7 30 report. If you want a laugh go to Current Affair and other commercial dross.


----------



## Logique (20 May 2019)

sileverback said:


> The thread title captured my attention.
> In truth the only credible news service in australia is the ABC. If you know what investigative journalism really means rely on Four Corners , 7 30 report. If you want a laugh go to Current Affair and other commercial dross.



Agree on Current Affair. But the ABC (except in the regions) is hardly a news service! More like a taxpayer-funded (1$Bill/ann!) Green Left opinion piece. It's Pravda, pure and simple.

We're paying taxes for a news service, not Pravda!


----------



## sileverback (20 May 2019)

Logique said:


> Agree on Current Affair. But the ABC (except in the regions) is hardly a news service! More like a taxpayer-funded (1$Bill/ann!) Green Left opinion piece. It's Pravda, pure and simple.
> 
> We're paying taxes for a news service, not Pravda!





Aw heck!

I was going to use the pravda analogy to apply to Rupert and his reptiles. He is a true blue goebbeler spreading the right wing nutter gospel across all the anglo brotherhood of nations. He's been operating for 60 years and he has the found the fractures in them and split them open in wide open suppurating wounds. Think the sinking of the american community accelerated by Bush and Trump. Think Britain recently being investigated by the UN for a Tory inspired epidemic of poverty and homelessness especially in northern england. Think scummo and his gang employing the high tenets of marketing to espouse principles as shallow as a puddle of piss.  So NO. pravda is mine.


----------



## wayneL (20 May 2019)

Rupert is not right wing,  he is a globalist and pushes the agenda to what suits that end. Sometimes left,  sometimes right.


----------



## IFocus (20 May 2019)

wayneL said:


> Rupert is not right wing,  he is a globalist and pushes the agenda to what suits that end. Sometimes left,  sometimes right.




Rupert has long sold his soul to make a buck and you are correct he will sell out to who ever but he prefers the right they are far easier to get angry and to corrupt.


----------



## Miss Hale (20 May 2019)

Logique said:


> Agree on Current Affair. But the ABC (except in the regions) is hardly a news service! More like a taxpayer-funded (1$Bill/ann!) Green Left opinion piece. It's Pravda, pure and simple.
> 
> We're paying taxes for a news service, not Pravda!




Even in the regions it's still a mouthpiece for the left. I used to live in a regional area and the local ABC radio station was just as left leaning as it is in the cities. Local commercial news services on the TV on the other hand were pretty neutral.


----------



## sptrawler (21 May 2019)

I love all this talk about right wing lunatics, what was the score at the elections?
A one nation bus set on fire, a liberal how to vote poll volunteer and a one nation volunteer stabbed. Self appraisal obviously isnt a left wing strong point


----------



## Joules MM1 (5 June 2019)

#raid quote of the day

John LyonsVerified account @*TheLyonsDen*  ·  2h2 hours ago


AFP RAID LIVE: back to surreality, after the AFP officer jokes that the ABC should have played “Rage” as they entered someone in the room thinks he says “Rake.” One AFP officer says: “I love Rake.”


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2019)

This is what you voted for, the jackboots of suppression of journalism and the public's right to know.

Disgusting.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06...-federal-police-afghan-files-stories/11181162


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> This is what you voted for, the jackboots of suppression of journalism and the public's right to know.
> 
> Disgusting.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06...-federal-police-afghan-files-stories/11181162



What you think the law wouldn't have applied, if Labor had been voted in.


----------



## bigdog (5 June 2019)

I regularly watch the ABC news at 7:00 PM

But prior to the election, I stopped watching because the political reporting was so biased.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> What you think the law wouldn't have applied, if Labor had been voted in.




I doubt it. There Green mates would have kicked up a stink.

I doubt if the Senate will take kindly to this, there could be trouble for the government.


----------



## sptrawler (5 June 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I doubt it. There Green mates would have kicked up a stink.
> 
> I doubt if the Senate will take kindly to this, there could be trouble for the government.



I guess it will boil back to if someone is doing something illegal, or the AFP are working outside their responsibilities, or if the press is whipping up a storm in a tea cup.
What is it that the Government has to worry about? Isn't it a AFP issue?


----------



## moXJO (5 June 2019)

Defense papers were leaked.
Govt doesn't have to really worry. If labor kicked up a stink they would become even more unpopular. 
This is a defense issue.


----------



## qldfrog (6 June 2019)

I am more worried about the ato whistle blower in SA
The abc journo has plenty of supporters, lawyers but the poor ato bloke...
Evil wins when ordinary people......


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> Defense papers were leaked.
> Govt doesn't have to really worry. If labor kicked up a stink they would become even more unpopular.
> This is a defense issue.



The reason we had a Royal Commission into banking was due to the detailed knowledge of insiders breaching their employment contracts to expose corrupt conduct.  And of course it was our "free" press which never let go of the bones they were offered by whistleblowers.
Should we need to live in a country where it is ok for our government to act in a manner which actively discourages matters of public interest to be reported?
Maybe you do not want to know that we are possibly hiding war crimes, or that we are going to be "spied  on" through means which will never be be publicised.  Or that any number of other acts of government agencies affect our liberties but will remain hidden.
What we are seeing is a government keen to shoot the messenger.  And somehow the government is claiming it is not sanctioning this!
........ lost for words.


----------



## Logique (6 June 2019)

sileverback said:


> Aw heck!
> I was going to use the pravda analogy to apply to Rupert and his reptiles. He is a true blue goebbeler spreading the right wing nutter gospel across all the anglo brotherhood of nations. He's been operating for 60 years and he has the found the fractures in them and split them open in wide open suppurating wounds. Think the sinking of the american community accelerated by Bush and Trump. Think Britain recently being investigated by the UN for a Tory inspired epidemic of poverty and homelessness especially in northern england. Think scummo and his gang employing the high tenets of marketing to espouse principles as shallow as a puddle of piss.  So NO. pravda is mine.



And yet people spend money to buy the Murdoch product. That's because they get some semblance of balance.

Aunty, unlike the private enterprise press, has a community charter to be balanced, _"Without Agenda or Bias". _It hoovers up $1Bill of taxpayers money every year.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> The reason we had a Royal Commission into banking was due to the detailed knowledge of insiders breaching their employment contracts to expose corrupt conduct.  And of course it was our "free" press which never let go of the bones they were offered by whistleblowers.
> Should we need to live in a country where it is ok for our government to act in a manner which actively discourages matters of public interest to be reported?



I suppose the problem is when public interest, becomes trail by media and when alleged incidents become widely held beliefs.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2019)

Logique said:


> And yet people spend money to buy the Murdoch product. That's because they get some semblance of balance.




No they don't , they get a mouthpiece for their own pre conceived views.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> No they don't , they get a mouthpiece for their own pre conceived views.



Never truer words spoken and it goes for all sides.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Never truer words spoken and it goes for all sides.




True.


----------



## PZ99 (6 June 2019)

Logique said:


> And yet people spend money to buy the Murdoch product. That's because they get some semblance of balance.
> 
> Aunty, unlike the private enterprise press, has a community charter to be balanced, _"Without Agenda or Bias". _It hoovers up $1Bill of taxpayers money every year.



Murdoch hoovers up more than that of taxpayers money because he is a tax avoider.

He should be paying us to read his biased diatribe - not scab it from people who subscribe to confirm their prejudices.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> The reason we had a Royal Commission into banking was due to the detailed knowledge of insiders breaching their employment contracts to expose corrupt conduct.  And of course it was our "free" press which never let go of the bones they were offered by whistleblowers.
> Should we need to live in a country where it is ok for our government to act in a manner which actively discourages matters of public interest to be reported?
> Maybe you do not want to know that we are possibly hiding war crimes, or that we are going to be "spied  on" through means which will never be be publicised.  Or that any number of other acts of government agencies affect our liberties but will remain hidden.
> What we are seeing is a government keen to shoot the messenger.  And somehow the government is claiming it is not sanctioning this!
> ........ lost for words.



This is a defense issue.  The govt isn't trying to hide sht. Papers were leaked and it needs to be investigated.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

The allegations are all still up on abc as well. No one has been silenced.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> This is a defense issue.  The govt isn't trying to hide sht. Papers were leaked and it needs to be investigated.



Had the information not been leaked we would not have known.
To claim the matter was not hidden flies in the face of the rationale for the initial search.  But I appreciate you may not understand that logic.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> I suppose the problem is when public interest, becomes trail by media and when alleged incidents become widely held beliefs.



I tried unsuccessfully to work that out.
Philosophically, "public interest" tests are trivial.
In other words we do not expect our government to conceal war crimes, nor do we - as Australian citizens - expect that our daily activities can be spied upon without reasonable cause.
Further, there is a difference between "alleged" incidents, and an evidentiary trail outlining events.  The issues are now subject to procedures of law enforcement and, if pursued, legal remedy.
The consequence will be that we will have a society where knowledge of unlawful behaviour of governments never comes to light because the government suppresses such "public interest" through imprisonment.
We do not have Whistleblower Legislation in Australia because our governments mostly want to hide other activities that public servants - rather than journalists - might bring to light.


----------



## Humid (6 June 2019)

Well at least Michaelia Cash didn’t have to tip off the media...


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> Had the information not been leaked we would not have known.
> To claim the matter was not hidden flies in the face of the rationale for the initial search.  But I appreciate you may not understand that logic.



I understand you are a little slow on how releasing classified material can have serious consequences. There is an ongoing investigation into Afghanistan. But bleet it up as much as you like. 
http://www.defence.gov.au/MJS/igadf-afghanistan-inquiry.asp


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> I tried unsuccessfully to work that out.
> Philosophically, "public interest" tests are trivial.
> In other words we do not expect our government to conceal war crimes, nor do we - as Australian citizens - expect that our daily activities can be spied upon without reasonable cause.



That is done every day by our phone companies, with our blessing.



rederob said:


> Further, there is a difference between "alleged" incidents, and an evidentiary trail outlining events.  The issues are now subject to procedures of law enforcement and, if pursued, legal remedy.



The trail by media circus has been going on for several years, it is only recently they have been legally challenged and in some cases fined.



rederob said:


> The consequence will be that we will have a society where knowledge of unlawful behaviour of governments never comes to light because the government suppresses such "public interest" through imprisonment.
> We do not have Whistleblower Legislation in Australia because our governments mostly want to hide other activities that public servants - rather than journalists - might bring to light.



If criminal behaviour has happened during military engagement, I'm sure there is legal procedures to address it, the second world war showed that.
To have public servants running a personal evidence information line to the press, at their own discretion, probably wouldn't be the best way to carry out an inquiry. Just my opinion.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2019)

Funny how Cabinet Ministers never get charged for leaking confidential Cabinet discussions.

No one got charged over the leaks that Gillard spoke in Cabinet against a pay rise for pensioners.

I'm sure there are a lot of examples on the other side too.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> I understand you are a little slow on how releasing classified material can have serious consequences. There is an ongoing investigation into Afghanistan. But bleet it up as much as you like.
> http://www.defence.gov.au/MJS/igadf-afghanistan-inquiry.asp



If there was nothing wrong with the information then why is it kept as "secret"?
Why is imprisonment a consequence of knowing?
I cannot see how jailing someone is mere "bleeting."  But you keep up the good work of defending what is becoming more of a regime headed by ex military, than a democracy.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> If criminal behaviour has happened during military engagement, I'm sure there is legal procedures to address it, the second world war showed that.



Yes.  They were called "show trials."


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Funny how Cabinet Ministers never get charged for leaking confidential Cabinet discussions.
> 
> No one got charged over the leaks that Gillard spoke in Cabinet against a pay rise for pensioners.
> 
> I'm sure there are a lot of examples on the other side too.



I don't think killing people and dismembering them, is part of Cabinet protocol, but they do butcher a lot of policy.lol


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

Heres the problem. We have sensitive papers in the hands of some dumbsht jornos.We don't know how damaging it could be. It could be names,  operational procedures,  positions.

 But it could easily be hacked by other nations.
 Disrupt on going investigations with legal proceedings.

Put families at risk as special forces names are usually kept private.

It could divulge operational tactics.

There are a host of factors beyond idiot jornos looking for a headline. If they are caught with classified info they should be charged.


----------



## basilio (6 June 2019)

On the  other hand ... another perspective.
To suggest that journos should be charged if they have classified information effectively criminalizes all investigative journalism into government activities. 
Is that what you are suggesting ?

*Kerry O'Brien says AFP raids on the ABC and Annika Smethurst 'go to the heart of democracy'*

Speaking to Patricia Karvelas on ABC Radio Melbourne's Mornings program, Mr O'Brien said "people have to be really clear about what's at stake here".

"If they care about democracy, this does go to the heart of democracy and the democratic process," he said.

"You are talking about the media going about its job in providing scrutiny to areas of government where scrutiny is not easy.

"You are also talking about the role of whistleblowers, who are mostly well-motivated people who are disturbed about what they are seeing inside the Government in this case."

The AFP raided the ABC's headquarters over a series of 2017 stories known as the Afghan Files, which detailed incidents of troops killing unarmed men and children.

The officers took away two USB drives containing about 100 files.

It came one day after the AFP searched the home of Smethurst, who had reported on secret plans to allow government spying.

"The message being sent is that this will happen to you if you are about to become a whistleblower," Mr O'Brien said.

"The full force of the state will be brought against you if you expose these. This Government would appear to be very sensitive to public opinions."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06...emocracy-is-at-stake-after-afp-raids/11184764


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

basilio said:


> Is that what you are suggesting ?



No I'm just not a fan of journos. Throw away comment.
But they do face jail even if the information is not published under treason laws, I'm sure.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

Whistle blowers during a time of war, are known as something else, it really is a fine line the one divulging the information walks.
As for journalists, they just keep pushing the boundaries more and more, in the name of "reporting".
Like I said earlier, some are starting to get taken to court and are being fined a lot of money. There is a line, it has been fading more and more over recent years, since censorship was loosened.
The time had to arrive where they are taken to account, for what they say and publish, I think more and more people will take them to task.
I'm amazed it hasn't happened earlier, I'm not only referring to the current issue. Just my opinion, everyone has there own interpretation.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Like I said earlier, some are starting to get taken to court and are being fined a lot of money.



There is a big difference between "public interest" and libel/slander.
Moxjo might not like what some journalists do, but the better ones are responsible for countless commissions of inquiry and Royal Commissions.  They can literally change the course of history and act in the betterment of society overall.  The track record of ABC journalists in this regard is exceptional, especially through *Four Corners*.
Morrison's government, with Dutton leading the charge, are taking us down the path of totalitarianism under the guise of national security.  One does not need to look far back into history to see how badly wrong this can go.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> There is a big difference between "public interest" and libel/slander.
> Moxjo might not like what some journalists do, but the better ones are responsible for countless commissions of inquiry and Royal Commissions.  They can literally change the course of history and act in the betterment of society overall.  The track record of ABC journalists in this regard is exceptional, especially through *Four Corners*.
> .



What you are saying is very true, however things do need to be validated, everyone is saying the AFP isn't acting correctly. But who is to say a whistle blower, is acting in the best interest of Australia, just because they are a whistle blower doesn't in itself make them honourable.
It would be irresponsible for the AFP not to check the whole thing thoroughly, the media are the ones blowing it up.
What would the media say, if the AFP didn't check things out and the whole names and addresses of the SAS had been taken in the process, the media would then blame the AFP for being incompetent.
It is all a bit childlike IMO, a bit like wanting the police to protect us, but they aren't allowed to use force because we don't like violence.
Or saying the press can't be raided, because sometimes they get things right and it has a good outcome.
What happened when Australia's investigative journo's, tried to grab those kids overseas and it turned pear shaped, they all nearly ended up in prison.


----------



## basilio (6 June 2019)

There are principles of redaction of documents to ensure that operational details that could arguably be used against , say, SAS soldiers not be divulged.  But there is also a public interest in holding governments to account for behaviours that break laws. These are the principles of a free and open press.

If we don't have a press that is able to publish evidence of malpractice any government can simply classify every document it creates and then point blank deny any accusations of misconduct  and say such accusations are lies, slander. They could then  get away with anything they want.

Sound fair enough ?


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

sptrawler said:


> ...everyone is saying the AFP isn't acting correctly.



They are exercising their powers.
This is like the Queensland Police exercising their power to prosecute a Sergeant who released video of innocent people being beaten in a paddy wagon.
The question is "*should they do it*" because it is within their power?
And if they do, is it self serving, or does it actually satisfy their vision of "Policing for a safer Australia?"
The AFP states: "We value fairness, trust, respect, accountability, integrity, commitment and excellence, in service of the community and for each other."  Maybe *they just do not value it too highly*.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> They are exercising their powers.
> This is like the Queensland Police exercising their power to prosecute a Sergeant who released video of innocent people being beaten in a paddy wagon.
> The question is "*should they do it*" because it is within their power?
> And if they do, is it self serving, or does it actually satisfy their vision of "Policing for a safer Australia?"
> The AFP states: "We value fairness, trust, respect, accountability, integrity, commitment and excellence, in service of the community and for each other."  Maybe *they just do not value it too highly*.



As we say everyone has an opinion, what someone finds unacceptable, another person could see as fair and just.
I've seen a police officer get a kick in the head from behind on t.v, he was left in a wheel chair, there is plenty of people who said he deserved it. The case went to court for years.
Nobody values the police, until they need them.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

basilio said:


> There are principles of redaction of documents to ensure that operational details that could arguably be used against , say, SAS soldiers not be divulged.  But there is also a public interest in holding governments to account for behaviours that break laws. These are the principles of a free and open press.
> 
> If we don't have a press that is able to publish evidence of malpractice any government can simply classify every document it creates and then point blank deny any accusations of misconduct  and say such accusations are lies, slander. They could then  get away with anything they want.
> 
> Sound fair enough ?




It still has to be checked, there is a process and there is due diligence required. The press can do their job, but they are not above the law.
As I said, what happened to that crew that tried to "rescue" those children?
The press can print "evidence" it can't fabricate it, or pervert the course of justice.
Freedom of the press, doesn't mean they can do and say what the hell they like, with no redress.


----------



## sptrawler (6 June 2019)

Well going by this report, it is nothing to do with the Government, a lot will find that very sad.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-government-interference-20190606-p51v77.html

Oh well just have to jump on something else, have you noticed Morrison is going bald, that must indicate something because Dutton is bald as well. 
Possibly a conspiracy involving a rise of power, involving bald males in blue ties, hijacking Australian politics?


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

*National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018*

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6022


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> *National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018*
> 
> https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6022



I hope you know that none of that legislation is relevant to the foregoing.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> I hope you know that none of that legislation is relevant to the foregoing.



 Crimes Act 1914 and Criminal Code Act 1995 to replace certain existing, and introduce new, offences relating to secrecy of information.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> Crimes Act 1914 and Criminal Code Act 1995 to replace certain existing, and introduce new, offences relating to secrecy of information.



Those matters are not relevant to the foregoing.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> Those matters are not relevant to the foregoing.



Yes they are.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> Yes they are.



I linked the legislation and suggest you do better next time.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2019)

rederob said:


> I linked the legislation and suggest you do better next time.



You didn't link anything.
You also did not read any of the amendments. It covers commonwealth officials handing over classified material. The holding of that material other then that of its place of purpose. And how many years you get trying not to drop any soap. It also covers journos.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

And heres a whole article on the link I provided https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...ll-threatens-journalists-with-jail-union-says

Weave your magic and tell me it isn't so Rob


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> And heres a whole article on the link I provided https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...ll-threatens-journalists-with-jail-union-says
> Weave your magic and tell me it isn't so Rob



I linked the legislation at post #3026.
It is a shame you do not understand what it covers.
No magic necessary, just a functional brain.


----------



## basilio (7 June 2019)

rederob said:


> I linked the legislation at post #3026.
> It is a shame you do not understand what it covers.
> No magic necessary, just a functional brain.




Suggest you check the link.  It said you have reached a moved or deleted page.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 June 2019)

It should be up to judges to decide whether material is detrimental to national security, not politicians.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

basilio said:


> Suggest you check the link.  It said you have reached a moved or deleted page.



Thanks Bas - fixed the link.
I have read the various Acts and I could not find how the 2018 legislation was relevant to what moxjo claimed as they were specific to Espionage and Foreign Interference.  That is not what the journalists were addressing.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

rederob said:


> Thanks Bas - fixed the link.
> I have read the various Acts and I could not find how the 2018 legislation was relevant to what moxjo claimed as they were specific to Espionage and Foreign Interference.  That is not what the journalists were addressing.



You didn't read it.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> It should be up to judges to decide whether material is detrimental to national security, not politicians.



They will judge on whether or not a *crime *has been committed.
The crime is most likely to relate to *how the information was obtained*, and not if it was a matter of national security.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> You didn't read it.



I read *all *the amended legislation.
Did you?
Or did you rely on something a newspaper reported?
Please link to the specific legislation if you think you have a case.  I took the long way of checking before saying what I have, above.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

The whistleblower was a commonwealth official that had taken documents from their proper place of custody. He is looking at jail time for taking, holding and passing on that information. He is screwed unfortunately. 

If any journalists were found to be holding or moving those files they are then up for potential  jail time. Its not so much the publishing the information for journalists but the possession of the documents.
 I only quickly scanned but there was a line that if the journalists showed it was in the publics interest then they could get away with publishing the story. Something along those lines anyway.

The raids were looking for files. I'm then not sure where abc journalists fall under all this as they are employed by the government. And I'm to lazy to read section 121.1 again.

Funnily enough the amendment  mentions increasing govts spying powers as well. I suppose the devil is in the details.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

rederob said:


> I read *all *the amended legislation.
> Did you?
> Or did you rely on something a newspaper reported?
> Please link to the specific legislation if you think you have a case.  I took the long way of checking before saying what I have, above.



No you didn't.
From roughly 1300 onwards of the Explanatory memorandum deals with documents and taking those documents. Its applicable to this case and is why the afp are doing raids searching for documents.


----------



## Humid (7 June 2019)

bigdog said:


> I regularly watch the ABC news at 7:00 PM
> 
> But prior to the election, I stopped watching because the political reporting was so biased.




Get one of them new TVs and use the split screen option
ABC on one and Skynews on the other and sit in the middle 
Ps Fox costs more


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> No you didn't.
> From roughly 1300 onwards of the Explanatory memorandum deals with documents and taking those documents. Its applicable to this case and is why the afp are doing raids searching for documents.



The only possible relevant part is Division 121 (g).
If the AFP are barking under that tree, it will fall on them.  Provisions at (g) are called "catch all" and the evidence to mount a reasonable case are not apparent from the recent conduct of the AFP.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

rederob said:


> The only possible relevant part is Division 121 (g).
> If the AFP are barking under that tree, it will fall on them.  Provisions at (g) are called "catch all" and the evidence to mount a reasonable case are not apparent from the recent conduct of the AFP.




The holding of the classified documents is what they will go for. 

They did bring in whistleblower laws to protect people so I wonder if they can charge him or not?


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

> New Division 122 includes defences to ensure the offences do not apply too broadly, including a defence specifically applying to journalists (as well as editorial and support staff) who reasonably believe that their conduct was in the public interest.  The offences ensure harmful information cannot be released, while appropriate defences protect freedom of speech.




This was part of what I read before.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

moXJO said:


> This was part of what I read before.



Division 122 requires that the information is "inherently harmful."
It is difficult to see how informing the public that war crimes may have been committed meets that test.  Nor does informing us that we could be spied on without reasonable cause.
As I said, I read at the legislation and find it sadly lacking relevance.

WRT to Division 121, the catch all provisions can potentially allow you, as an ordinary person, to be charged for telling a foreign visitor that we do not have sailors to crew our war ships.  In fact, such a report was published in the media the other day, and is a far more serious breach of "national security" than could be alleged by the AFP with regard to the 2 journalists.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

> 1638.        The extension of the defence to a person who deals with or holds information is intended to allow journalists to undertake a range of activities that are necessary in the course of fair and accurate public interest journalism. For example, journalists must obtain or collect information from a source, hold and deal with that information the course of researching and preparing a story, and deal with that information in course of consulting with editors, experts and relevant Australian Government officials to satisfy the journalist as to the appropriate balance between competing public interests. Additionally, the extension for the defence to a person who holds information is intended to enable journalists to perform the important function of ‘filtering’ stories that are contrary to the public interest. From time-to-time, journalists may obtain or collect information from sources, and determine that it would be contrary to the public interest to publish some or all of that information. For example, in some cases, the public interest may be fully served by publishing a certain amount of information, whereas the publication of further information or particular details may, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. It is intended that journalists should be permitted to deal with information, and then determine to either publish the information, or to hold the information rather than to publish the information.
> 
> 1639.        The term ‘journalist’ should take its ordinary and natural meaning. For example, the Macquarie Dictionary defines ‘journalist’ as being a person engaged in ‘journalism’, being ‘the business or occupation of writing, editing, and producing photographic images for print media and the production or news and news analysis for broadcast media’. Similarly, the Oxford Dictionary defines ‘journalist’ as ‘a person who writes for newspapers, magazines, or news websites or prepares news to be broadcast’. A journalist need not be regularly employed in a professional capacity, and may include a person who self-publishes news or news analysis.
> 
> ...




A bit more for journalists.


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2019)

It sounds to me, a test case is in the making.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2019)

rederob said:


> Division 122 requires that the information is "inherently harmful."
> It is difficult to see how informing the public that war crimes may have been committed meets that test.  Nor does informing us that we could be spied on without reasonable cause.
> As I said, I read at the legislation and find it sadly lacking relevance.
> 
> WRT to Division 121, the catch all provisions can potentially allow you, as an ordinary person, to be charged for telling a foreign visitor that we do not have sailors to crew our war ships.  In fact, such a report was published in the media the other day, and is a far more serious breach of "national security" than could be alleged by the AFP with regard to the 2 journalists.



It comes down to the documents and not so much about the story in regards to journalists. If its in the publics interest then they have the freedom to report it. Classified documents not been held in their place of purpose is where they will get charged. 

We also don't know the full extent of whats in the documents. Or how secure the documents are. Some idiot might have it on a non-secure laptop. Chinese have already hacked Australia to death.
If names are mentioned people can be threatened or compromised. 
Journalists should not be above the law in such cases. Them crying foul doesn’t hold weight.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2019)

"


moXJO said:


> It comes down to the documents and not so much about the story in regards to journalists. If its in the publics interest then they have the freedom to report it. Classified documents not been held in their place of purpose is where they will get charged.
> 
> We also don't know the full extent of whats in the documents. Or how secure the documents are. Some idiot might have it on a non-secure laptop. Chinese have already hacked Australia to death.
> If names are mentioned people can be threatened or compromised.
> Journalists should not be above the law in such cases. Them crying foul doesn’t hold weight.



"*Asked what the harm of revealing alleged wrongdoing by Australian troops or plans to extend spying laws was, Gaughan said the substance of the reports was “irrelevant” and that the mere fact of disclosure of protected information was a crime.*"
Maybe he has never read the "*Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013" *because it protects *content *rather than source documents.


----------



## DB008 (16 June 2019)

It's interesting that the MM don't give 2 hoots about Wikileaks or Assange, but when the heat is turned on them, they are squealing like pigs. Talk about a bunch of hypocrites.....


----------



## DB008 (27 September 2019)

I've noticed now that the top story on the ABC (https://www.abc.net.au/news/) is almost always bashing the opposition or Trump.


----------



## chiff (27 September 2019)

DB008 said:


> I've noticed now that the top story on the ABC (https://www.abc.net.au/news/) is almost always bashing the opposition or Trump.



"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"Isn't the ABC the only media organisation that has checks on their perceived bias?


----------



## basilio (27 September 2019)

DB008 said:


> I've noticed now that the top story on the ABC (https://www.abc.net.au/news/) is almost always bashing the opposition or Trump.




Is it possible that right now the story of how Donald Trump leaned on the Ukrainian PM to investigate Bidens son and then hid the conversations because it looked as if he was using his office for partisan political ends which is totally uncool
     is the biggest story of the day ?


----------



## wayneL (27 September 2019)

basilio said:


> Is it possible that right now the story of how Donald Trump leaned on the Ukrainian PM to investigate Bidens son and then hid the conversations because it looked as if he was using his office for partisan political ends which is totally uncool
> is the biggest story of the day ?



It's a non story bazzzz


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2019)

Maybe the ABC, should be a subscription t.v, then those who want it can pay for it.
Just a thought.lol


----------



## PZ99 (13 November 2019)

Probably not the right thread but the ABC have really screwed this one up 

https://www.news.com.au/national/un...y/news-story/584bcc2fc1bb28c534ff8d7a79e660f1


----------



## SirRumpole (13 November 2019)

PZ99 said:


> Probably not the right thread but the ABC have really screwed this one up
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/national/un...y/news-story/584bcc2fc1bb28c534ff8d7a79e660f1




Not sure if a smiley is the right emoticon here, it seems a pretty unprofessional blunder by someone who should have known better.


----------



## qldfrog (13 November 2019)

While this can happen, in that case, it could gave serious implication for the victims, via reprisal, distortion of potential judgement, i think a journo, not even green...in experience.. should know better, why even keep the name at all, even in draft versions?
Anyway, was not about another Trump headline so no one at abc cared much
ABC going the way of news limited with your tax dollars


----------



## basilio (29 November 2019)

ABC s joining other news organisations in developing a secure dropbox system for sensitive stories so that whistleblowers can stray anonymous and alive. It also protects them from political interferance when unpalatable stories get leaked.

So if anyone has some of that dirt you wanted exposed - go for it !!

* How to use SecureDrop to contact ABC journalists *
The ABC has a long history of agenda-setting, public interest journalism that holds the powerful to account. We are bound by our editorial policies to maintain the anonymity of our confidential sources.

SecureDrop is a tool for sources to anonymously submit documents and communicate with our journalists. It is not the only way of securely contacting an ABC journalist, but it is one of the best, and is used by highly respected news organisations internationally.

Using SecureDrop is more complicated than picking up the phone or sending an email, but if you follow the steps carefully you can have a high level of confidence that your communication with ABC journalists is secure. 
https://www.abc.net.au/news/securedrop/


----------



## Logique (1 January 2020)

A big shout out to regional ABC radio - they've been outstanding during the 2019-20 bushfire crisis in NSW (and other states). Providing  regular bushfire situation updates, and info about community services and road access.  
You can tell that the announcers are often unwilling to leave their posts, they just want to stay on and contribute.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 January 2020)

Logique said:


> A big shout out to regional ABC radio - they've been outstanding during the 2019-20 bushfire crisis in NSW (and other states). Providing  regular bushfire situation updates, and info about community services and road access.
> You can tell that the announcers are often unwilling to leave their posts, they just want to stay on and contribute.




Several of the regular ABC people who you would expect to be on holidays have cancelled them to come back and work.

That's professionalism and dedication.

Are Alan Jones and Ray Hadley on air this week ?


----------



## basilio (6 January 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Several of the regular ABC people who you would expect to be on holidays have cancelled them to come back and work.
> 
> That's professionalism and dedication.
> *
> Are Alan Jones and Ray Hadley on air this week ?*




Hmmm. And what would they be saying ?


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2020)

basilio said:


> Hmmm. And what would they be saying ?




Probably blaming arsonists and migrants.


----------



## wayneL (6 January 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Probably blaming arsonists and migrants.



So the people lighting the fires shouldn't be held responsible, so long as it fits the alarmist narrative?


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2020)

wayneL said:


> So the people lighting the fires shouldn't be held responsible, so long as it fits the alarmist narrative?




Sure punish arsonists for the existence of the fires, but the severity of them is down to the climate.


----------



## IFocus (6 January 2020)

wayneL said:


> So the people lighting the fires shouldn't be held responsible, so long as it fits the alarmist narrative?




Saw the numbers some where arson is 13% of the fire starts but public floggings would be a good place to start.


----------



## sptrawler (6 January 2020)

IFocus said:


> Saw the numbers some where arson is 13% of the fire starts but public floggings would be a good place to start.



*NSW bushfires: police set to charge a dozen with arson*


----------



## macca (6 January 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure punish arsonists for the existence of the fires, but the severity of them is down to the climate.




The severity of them is caused by lack of burning off in winter, the policies which made hazard reduction almost impossible are solely to blame for this slaughter house.

If things were done as they used to be 30 years ago the drought would have caused fires but when they hit the cleared areas they would have stopped or have been stopped by the RFS

Every enquiry has said the same thing, every govt has ignored the recommendations, if you grow a big bonfire one day it is going to burn.

If we burn off somewhere every winter the arsonists  are going to be disappointed when we put it out the next day.


----------



## wayneL (6 January 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure punish arsonists for the existence of the fires, but the severity of them is down to the climate.



 I agree, especially having omitted the word "change". but refer to the video I posted it on the other thread for discussion on other factors involved (which in fact, have already been discussed here)


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2020)

macca said:


> The severity of them is caused by lack of burning off in winter, the policies which made hazard reduction almost impossible are solely to blame for this slaughter house.
> 
> If things were done as they used to be 30 years ago the drought would have caused fires but when they hit the cleared areas they would have stopped or have been stopped by the RFS
> 
> ...




So , no climate factors at all, like extreme heat , low humidity and high winds ?


----------



## sptrawler (17 February 2020)

Looks as though the AFP raids were legal.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-17/afp-warrants-used-to-raid-abc-valid-court-rules/11971018


----------



## SirRumpole (17 February 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Looks as though the AFP raids were legal.
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-17/afp-warrants-used-to-raid-abc-valid-court-rules/11971018




Legal maybe, but it's the sort of thing you usually associate with Russia or China.


----------



## sptrawler (17 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Legal maybe, but it's the sort of thing you usually associate with Russia or China.



I guess when it involves National Security, the rules don't vary that much, no matter where you are.
The problem we have IMO, is Journoe's here feel they are above and beyond the law, I'm surprised more don't get themselves in trouble especially with regard slander.
I guess it goes back to the old saying of giving more and more rope, eventually it gets tight.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 February 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I guess when it involves National Security, the rules don't vary that much, no matter where you are.
> The problem we have IMO, is Journoe's here feel they are above and beyond the law, I'm surprised more don't get themselves in trouble especially with regard slander.




As far as the Afghan story is concerned, that happened 3 years ago, so talk of a National Security threat today is bunk imo.


----------



## sptrawler (17 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> As far as the Afghan story is concerned, that happened 3 years ago, so talk of a National Security threat today is bunk imo.



It probably isn't the content that was the issue, it was the fact that it was classified information and probably had to be run past the military for clearance to publish.
If the press take it upon themselves to decide, you may as well just let them run the Country, oh I forgot they do.


----------



## Logique (19 February 2020)

Regional ABC provides a valuable service, and for the most part doesn't lecture us on politics.

The national news and current affairs programs on the other hand..

Dear PM, here is an 8 point plan for Pravda ..er the ABC (no charge):

1. De-centralize the headquarters to Albury-Wodonga, or Toowoomba
2. Cut down the endless proliferation/repetition of radio and TV channels/stations
3. Retain regional stations/programs 
4. Retain the radio Classic FM station
5. Meet the government charter, _"Without Agenda or Bias"_ ..that's baloney
6. Get a Minister, a Chair and Board with the bottle to put a bit of stick about and fire some people, _Media Watch_ ie 'Conservative Watch' and Paul Barry can be first out the door.
7. Allow judicious use of commercial advertising
8. Reduce the annual budget to $750 million p.a.
_
"*What Ita Forgot*
Source: Posted on 3:56 pm, February 18, 2020 by The Artist Formerly Known As Spartacus
Link: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2020/02/18/what-ita-forgot/

In a recent speech in Canberra, ABC Chairman Ita Buttrose stressed:
that the national broadcaster did not only need funds for emergency broadcasting, but also, in her words, for “Australian drama, children’s content, independent public interest journalism and Australian music, arts, science and educational programs”.

She forgot to ask for money for *culture wars, re-education programs, partisan propaganda, travel junkets, BBC purchases* and other such important things that money must be taken by force from citizens to fund."

_


----------



## IFocus (19 February 2020)

ABC most reliable and trusted news source in Australia say no more.


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

Any centre-right site will declare the ABC is biased 

But I do agree with points 2, 7 & 8 in the post from @Logique


----------



## wayneL (19 February 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Any centre-right site will declare the ABC is biased



Of course they will, because it is.


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

wayneL said:


> Of course they will, because it is.



Because it's not - and will stay that way until a credible balanced view says otherwise. 

The irony is the last 3 chairs were put there by conservative Govts to "re-balance" the ABC.

If the sycophants are still complaining they are merely showing their own unbalanced view.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

Too many ads, too much repitition on the News Channel, generally Leftish agenda (indigenous , women, minorities sob stories), not enough science, tech or optimism, but still 100% better than any of Rupert's or Kerry Stokes efforts as far as quality journalism goes.


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

Yep, replace the wasted ads with revenue ads. 

Merge Parliament radio with National radio and lease the freed up spectrum to a commercial network.

Cap the pay for chairs, directors, executives, on-air staff. It's a public service after all.

Those 3 things alone will slash the running costs.


----------



## wayneL (19 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Too many ads, too much repitition on the News Channel, generally Leftish agenda (indigenous , women, minorities sob stories), not enough science, tech or optimism, but still 100% better than any of Rupert's or Kerry Stokes efforts as far as quality journalism goes.



Agree they are absolute shyte... tabloid rubbish mostly, notwithstanding a very few exceptional programs. 

We don't actually have very much balanced journalism at all from either Auntie or the globalist media (balance being a subjective measure).


----------



## Logique (19 February 2020)

People know when they are being scammed.

The national broadcaster ABC has a government charter of balance. But ABC_ national news and current affairs_ has been infiltrated and captured by an inner-city collective, unconnected to real Australia. 

Regional ABC excepted, it is exceptional and beyond reproach.

Why should taxpayers subsidize just one side of an argument? Especially one so destructive to the nation's future, it's Pravda, and at an exhorbitant cost of $1.1 Billion p.a. - and Ita wants more! 

You're kidding Ita Buttrose, a reduction in your budget is what you deserve!


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

People know when they are being scammed.
More to the point people know when they are not being scammed. 

Every investigation into fair, balanced, accurate and impartial reporting has concluded that taxpayers are not subsidising only one side of an argument.

Even more tellingly, the latest investigation found they are not distorting the media market.

How much did that inquiry cost ? Half a million dollars. For nothing.

So no wonder the Conservatives want to slash the ABC budget - so they can then blow the savings on their own special brand of vexatious bull shyte whilst complaining of the odour


----------



## wayneL (19 February 2020)

PZ99 said:


> People know when they are being scammed.
> More to the point people know when they are not being scammed.
> 
> Every investigation into fair, balanced, accurate and impartial reporting has concluded that taxpayers are not subsidising only one side of an argument.
> ...



Hohoho.... Hahahaha....BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Funny guy


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

@Logique  Not sure whether you're agreeing with me or quoting me  
https://theconversation.com/abc-and...-media-market-government-inquiry-finds-108690
https://theconversation.com/abc-and...-media-market-government-inquiry-finds-108690

PS, This post was a reply to a request for proof that was umm... nefariously deleted


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Not sure whether you're agreeing with me or quoting me
> https://theconversation.com/abc-and...-media-market-government-inquiry-finds-108690


----------



## Logique (19 February 2020)

''_latest investigation_'..?

Let's move beyond Ultimo and Fitzroy and ask about the ABC's ".._fair, balanced, accurate and impartial reporting_". It's time the inner-city staff collective was held accountable.

_"Without Agenda or Bias"_..ABC.  This is a lie, and an insult to ordinary taxpaying Australians.

It is an affront to all taxpayers, currently paying $1.1 Billion p.a. to the (allegedly) National broadcaster.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

Logique said:


> ''_latest investigation_'..?
> 
> Let's move beyond Ultimo and Fitzroy and ask about the ABC's ".._fair, balanced, accurate and impartial reporting_". It's time the inner-city staff collective was held accountable.
> 
> ...




Show some examples please.


----------



## Logique (19 February 2020)

PZ99 said:


> https://theconversation.com/abc-and...-media-market-government-inquiry-finds-108690@Logique  Not sure whether you're agreeing with me or quoting me
> PS, This post was a reply to a request for proof that was umm... nefariously deleted



Sorry mate, cross posting


----------



## PZ99 (19 February 2020)

Interesting > apart from the Guardian I've never heard of those other lefty outlets.



Logique said:


> ''_latest investigation_'..?
> 
> Let's move beyond Ultimo and Fitzroy and ask about the ABC's ".._fair, balanced, accurate and impartial reporting_". It's time the inner-city staff collective was held accountable.
> 
> ...



If you think it's a lie it's up to you to prove it.

Here's a tip. Personal bias against employees based on what side of the latte line they live in just doesn't cut da mustard 



Logique said:


> Sorry mate, cross posting



Nah, all good - time travel in cyberspace is fun when it works.


----------



## Logique (19 February 2020)

PZ and SirR,
the burden of proof is with the alleged national broadcaster, currently asking the federal government -  which it relentlessly trashes (on the taxpayers dollar) to increase it's $1.1 Billion p.a. budget

ABC national news - hire one conservative. Hire just one.

Then I might think about giving you more taxpayers dollars


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

Logique said:


> PZ and SirR,
> the burden of proof is with the alleged national broadcaster, currently asking the federal government -  which it relentlessly trashes (on the taxpayers dollar) to increase it's $1.1 Billion p.a. budget
> 
> ABC national news - hire one conservative. Hire just one.
> ...




If you don't like ABC news, why are you watching it ?

I don't watch it either I get the news online, but how does the ABC present the News in a "Leftist" way ?


----------



## macca (19 February 2020)

If we think about it, the ABC is really meant to be a way of the government sharing info with the Oz public, that was it's original purpose.

So it really only needs one website, one radio network and one TV network.

SBS was started as a way for those who did not speak english to catch up on the news etc. So, now that we have the NBN we can close SBS completely, no longer needed.

We also do not need multiple ABC channels either, we can get alternative views and news online.

So I reckon we can do that and the budget can be $500k


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

macca said:


> If we think about it, the ABC is really meant to be a way of the government sharing info with the Oz public, that was it's original purpose.
> 
> So it really only needs one website, one radio network and one TV network.




It was also there to provide some relief from the awful American tv crap thrust on us.


----------



## qldfrog (19 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> If you don't like ABC news, why are you watching it ?
> 
> I don't watch it either I get the news online, but how does the ABC present the News in a "Leftist" way ?



are you genuinely asking that SrRumpole?


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

qldfrog said:


> are you genuinely asking that SrRumpole?




Well, I watch a lot of News24 and I can't really see how they are "Lefty". They show Morrison's press conferences and Albanese's so that seems pretty fair to me.


----------



## qldfrog (19 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, I watch a lot of News24 and I can't really see how they are "Lefty". They show Morrison's press conferences and Albanese's so that seems pretty fair to me.



News 24 kind of ok, they present facts, headlines like justin etc usually ok,
It is usually the "journalism" behind which is not only biaised but usually dumb
 explaining you how reality is based on a 25y old gender study female student view of the world who genuinely think that our cities are going to be submerged in 20y by global warming caused by co2
It is more like the article Germany gets rid of coal...one i read lately

Well yes as too expensive in Germany, and will do this in the next 30y.. not exactly what the title meant

News ltd has horrendous click bait articles with as much BS, and the courier Mail thinks a title without a bad pun is not a title.
Really pathetic to be honest

Honestly if they could stick as a reuter and afp..like news24? no problem
Give me facts all of them, i can sort and make my own opinion
I do not need one from a younger less travelled less educated than me.
A good editorial by a real expert will then fill the voids

And they definitively follow an agenda..which might meet the gov sometimes remember Pauline lynching etc during Howard years?

I have to say since Abbot is gone and Trump won his case, they must feel defeated as their rant is not as strident

Coincidentally, i had just posted an al jazeera vs ABC headlines this arvo in the corvir19 thread
It is quite stunning imho.?
Australia is not supposed to worry
I should try ABC news24
Thanks for the hint


----------



## Logique (21 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


>



Appreciate the chart SirR, but I think it leans way Left


----------



## SirRumpole (21 February 2020)

Logique said:


> Leftist piffle, anyone can see that





Actually I would put "The Drum" in "leans Left", the others are probably where they should be.


----------



## Logique (21 February 2020)

I think Paul Barry, Virginia Trioli, Fran Kelly and Leigh Sales would _love_ to move to Albury-Wodonga or Toowoomba!

There, they could mix freely with everyday Australians, and become even better national broadcasters (on the taxpayers dollar)!

Also the property rental and Council rates would be much cheaper in these regional locations, saving a lot of money for the ABC..and hence taxpayers


----------



## PZ99 (21 February 2020)

You wouldn't save any money. You still have to relay the signal to Sydney to get to the satellites.

Anyway I have it on good authority that everyday Australians live in Sydney and Melbourne too


----------



## IFocus (22 February 2020)

ABC most reliable and trusted news source in Australia.

"Majority (68%) of respondents think the ABC is more important in an age of social media and fake news, including 64% of LNP and 61% of One Nation voters;"

https://www.tai.org.au/content/abc-still-australia-s-most-trusted-news-source


"“Australians told us that their trust of the ABC is driven by its lack of bias and impartiality, quality journalism and ethics. While their distrust of Facebook and social media is driven by fake news, manipulated truth, false statistics and fake audience measurement,” said Roy Morgan CEO Michele Levine."

https://www.yourlifechoices.com.au/news/most-trusted-media-outlet-revealed


----------



## sptrawler (24 February 2020)

Sounds as though someone has been naughty and not stuck to the script.

https://www.theage.com.au/culture/t...entator-gerard-henderson-20200224-p543wh.html


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds as though someone has been naughty and not stuck to the script.
> 
> https://www.theage.com.au/culture/t...entator-gerard-henderson-20200224-p543wh.html




That's a shame, I liked Gerard even though I didn't agree with him most of the time, but sometimes did.

His battles with David Marr added some life to the show, which was getting tired in Barrie's last days.

David Speers is good except he interrupts too much in interviews.


----------



## sptrawler (24 February 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> .
> 
> David Speers is good except he interrupts too much in interviews.



Does he interrupt, when people aren't following his directions, or when it really is required?
What really put me off interviewers was when they interrupt, to either break the persons concentration, or because they didn't want the person to finish what they were trying to explain.
In the end the interviewer may as well, just give the interviewee a pre written script to read out, because they certainly didn't want to hear what they had to say, even if the person was an expert in the subject.
That is the main reason, I don't watch any current affairs, or news programmes.


----------



## Logique (25 February 2020)

PZ99 said:


> You wouldn't save any money. You still have to relay the signal to Sydney to get to the satellites.
> Anyway I have it on good authority that everyday Australians live in Sydney and Melbourne too



Power it up with the renewable energy, not a problem.  Ultimo - everyday Australia is a stretch


----------



## Logique (25 February 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds as though someone has been naughty and not stuck to the script.
> https://www.theage.com.au/culture/t...entator-gerard-henderson-20200224-p543wh.html



The Last Conservative on the ABC?  Surprised Gerard lasted as long as he did. 

Which program is the least watchable, _Insiders_ or _Q&A_, it's a close run thing.


----------



## Humid (25 February 2020)

Try reading a book.... something from Mark Manson
It worked for me


----------



## bellenuit (13 March 2020)

There was some discussion recently on one of the other Forums as to whether Kevin Rudd's stimulus was the reason we did not fall into recession and many discussions in the past. I have heard economists debate the issue and it would appear even among them that it is inconclusive (though they tended to align along political lines).

Today on some ABC Radio National program it was declared as a given - no argument.

I'm paraphrasing, but the program opening went like: "Kevin Rudd's stimulus package prevented Australia going into recession back whenever. Today we are interviewing the architect of that policy ...."


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2020)

bellenuit said:


> There was some discussion recently on one of the other Forums as to whether Kevin Rudd's stimulus was the reason we did not fall into recession and many discussions in the past. I have heard economists debate the issue and it would appear even among them that it is inconclusive (though they tended to align along political lines).
> 
> Today on some ABC Radio National program it was declared as a given - no argument.
> 
> I'm paraphrasing, but the program opening went like: "Kevin Rudd's stimulus package prevented Australia going into recession back whenever. Today we are interviewing the architect of that policy ...."




How can you prove a negative ? No one can prove that had we not had that package we would not have gone into recession.

A lot of countries went into recession without such measures, the evidence is pretty strong that it did have the required effect.

I suppose that if the presenter added the words "in the opinion of a lot of economists..." then that would have been more appropriate.

It's a policy that is largely being echoed by the LNP today.


----------



## chiff (14 March 2020)

bellenuit said:


> There was some discussion recently on one of the other Forums as to whether Kevin Rudd's stimulus was the reason we did not fall into recession and many discussions in the past. I have heard economists debate the issue and it would appear even among them that it is inconclusive (though they tended to align along political lines).
> 
> Today on some ABC Radio National program it was declared as a given - no argument.
> 
> I'm paraphrasing, but the program opening went like: "Kevin Rudd's stimulus package prevented Australia going into recession back whenever. Today we are interviewing the architect of that policy ...."



What I remember is that on the Monday I was going to withdraw all of my savings from the banks-but on the Sunday Rudd guaranteed savings up to 250k so my panic was not acted apon.That measure by Rudd seemed to calm affairs.


----------



## IFocus (14 March 2020)

Irony if Rudds (Ken Henrys) stimulus didn't do anything why are the current clowns act doing a stimulus?

BTW mining today is far bigger than ever during the boom under Rudd so surely it will save us again?


----------



## bellenuit (14 March 2020)

IFocus said:


> Irony if Rudds (Ken Henrys) stimulus didn't do anything why are the current clowns act doing a stimulus?
> 
> BTW mining today is far bigger than ever during the boom under Rudd so surely it will save us again?




Nobody said it didn't do anything.


----------



## bellenuit (14 March 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> How can you prove a negative ? No one can prove that had we not had that package we would not have gone into recession.
> 
> A lot of countries went into recession without such measures, the evidence is pretty strong that it did have the required effect.
> 
> ...




Yes. I agree. Those few words would have made all the difference in not seeming biased.


----------



## wayneL (16 March 2020)

In my opinion Rudd stimulus made us far more vulnerable than we might have been.

In the broad scheme of things what did Rudd's stimulus actually do?

Apart from massively expanding government debt, it did nothing.... Well probably aristocrat and Philip Morris did ok out of it.

The overall economy is far more vulnerable, we p1ssed away our ability to be able to deal with this current crisis, which potentially is bigger by several degrees.

All to appeas a few publicly listed companies.

Socialist try to create a narrative that this is why capitalism doesn't work, in fact, this is not capitalism but rather corporatism. And there is a massive difference between the two.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> Apart from massively expanding government debt, it did nothing...




A lot of economists disagree with you.
China helped certainly but so did the stimulus.

I take it you are arguing against Morrison's stimulus ?

As for debt, take a look at what it is now and what it was when Rudd left office.


----------



## wayneL (16 March 2020)

My answers in blue



SirRumpole said:


> A lot of economists disagree with you.
> 
> Agreed, but many agree... Subjective.
> 
> ...


----------



## Humid (16 March 2020)

And the debt?


----------



## Humid (16 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> In my opinion Rudd stimulus made us far more vulnerable than we might have been.
> 
> In the broad scheme of things what did Rudd's stimulus actually do?
> 
> ...




I think Howard and Costello were at the urinal first....and didn’t flush


----------



## Humid (16 March 2020)

https://independentaustralia.net/po...ecords-in-december--along-with-promises,13556

Check the slice of pie


----------



## wayneL (16 March 2020)

Humid said:


> I think Howard and Costello were at the urinal first....and didn’t flush



I didn't think we were speaking, bruh.

But anyway, interesting pastime you have there... Not something I would particularly want to know about


----------



## Humid (16 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> I didn't think we were speaking, bruh.
> 
> But anyway, interesting pastime you have there... Not something I would particularly want to know about




And the debt?


----------



## wayneL (16 March 2020)

Humid said:


> And the debt?



What is your question?

But as a general principle you come on existen relies on and deck in order to grow. Without that the economy collapses. However it must be serviced in one way or another, so excessive debt is obviously unhealthy for individuals, businesses, and government.

I have a client who is a PhD economist argues that the level of government debt is not a problem, whereas private debt is very much a problem.

I'm not an economist, but I'm not very comfortable with the level of government debt and absolutely alarmed about private debt.

Does that answer your query?


----------



## Humid (16 March 2020)

Yes
When you said all the Rudd effort did was expand goverment debt I had the impression that was bad in your opinion


----------



## moXJO (16 March 2020)

There's a little more to it. All the libs saving measures were blocked in 2014. Didn't hockey get the Arse for it. Ever since saving measures have been blocked. Libs have not controlled spending either.


----------



## PZ99 (16 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> Apart from massively expanding government debt, it did nothing.... Well probably aristocrat and Philip Morris did ok out of it.




That sentence contradicts itself - if Aristocrat / Morris did OK it must have done something.

Therefore it must have also done something for all the hands it passed through on the way.


----------



## wayneL (17 March 2020)

PZ99 said:


> That sentence contradicts itself - if Aristocrat / Morris did OK it must have done something.
> 
> Therefore it must have also done something for all the hands it passed through on the way.



Okay let's do it once a month then


----------



## PZ99 (17 March 2020)

wayneL said:


> Okay let's do it once a month then



That's exactly what the reserve bank is doing


----------



## Logique (17 March 2020)

Humid said:


> Try reading a book.... something from Mark Manson
> It worked for me



Not one with long sentences in it I'll wager, nonetheless a fair suggestion


----------



## IFocus (17 March 2020)

moXJO said:


> There's a little more to it. All the libs saving measures were blocked in 2014. Didn't hockey get the Arse for it. Ever since saving measures have been blocked. Libs have not controlled spending either.




And yes there is more 

Abbott and Hockey also had a spending program on their own pet giveaways plus Turnbul, plus Morrison plus they were keen to attack the revenue side as well all the time blaming Labors debt $50 bil.

Where are we now $350 plus bil 

Was the interest rate that high?

Note it was the increase in revenue that got Morrison "back in the black" not management that was only management of $3bil in rorts.

Worked politically so well its repeated ad nauseum.


----------



## Humid (17 March 2020)

Logique said:


> Not one with long sentences in it I'll wager, nonetheless a fair suggestion




Not too long you’ll probably nod off


----------



## moXJO (17 March 2020)

IFocus said:


> And yes there is more
> 
> Abbott and Hockey also had a spending program on their own pet giveaways plus Turnbul, plus Morrison plus they were keen to attack the revenue side as well all the time blaming Labors debt $50 bil.
> 
> ...



Last few lib govt have been terrible. But saving measures were blocked in the early days.
Once the seal is broken, pollies  on either side start pissing it away.


----------



## IFocus (17 March 2020)

Wrong thread but worth a read

https://www.michaelwest.com.au/priv...3xlb4LbEZZ1b2oSjGCSINp5OIYoEHaMKyeUEUUs0ySIDY


----------



## macca (17 March 2020)

On the chart they ask WHY ?

We have answered that here on ASF, maybe we should be the Govt, we have lefties and righties and Greenies, we are ready !!

Why ? because even thought the RBA has Not noticed it, society has changed.

It has been over 70 years since a big war and people have had the chance to build assets, when interest rates drop those with assets stop spending.

Those with assets are the ones that buy new cars, do extensions, go on holidays etc etc 

Those in debt use the reduced rates to reduce debt and those on drugs contribute to the cash in the suitcase crims


----------



## sptrawler (17 March 2020)

macca said:


> On the chart they ask WHY ?
> 
> We have answered that here on ASF, maybe we should be the Govt, we have lefties and righties and Greenies, we are ready !!
> 
> ...



Nailed it, with no political bias whatsoever.


----------



## sptrawler (25 March 2020)

I wonder if the ABC will become a public service, while the corona virus shutdown is on and concentrate on quality educational school children focused content?
There must be plenty of free archived school level educational content available.


----------



## MovingAverage (25 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder if the ABC will become a public service, while the corona virus shutdown is on and concentrate on quality educational school children focused content?
> There must be plenty of free archived school level educational content available.




funny you should mention that, my 8 year son is right into watching old episodes of the curiosity show. Some of those episodes were tapping into social issues well ahead of their time.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 March 2020)

MovingAverage said:


> funny you should mention that, my 8 year son is right into watching old episodes of the curiosity show. Some of those episodes were tapping into social issues well ahead of their time.




The Curiosity Show. Excellent program. I sometimes watch YouTubes of it.

Very educational.


----------



## sptrawler (25 March 2020)

Even if they dust off the old professor Julius Sumner Miller, "Why is it so" stuff, National Geographic etc and dump some of the chit chat gossip crap.
Just my opinion, but let's be honest the junk is dumped, if they get a top shelf sporting event. They soon find space then.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Even if they dust off the old professor Julius Sumner Miller, "Why is it so" stuff, National Geographic etc and dump some of the chit chat gossip crap.
> Just my opinion, but let's be honest the junk is dumped, if they get a top shelf sporting event. They soon find space then.




Harry Messell's Summer Science skool of the 60's, another good one.


----------



## MovingAverage (25 March 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Harry Messell's Summer Science skool of the 60's, another good one.



Haven’t heard of that but will see if I can find it on youtube


----------



## sptrawler (25 March 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Harry Messell's Summer Science skool of the 60's, another good one.



Wouldn't it be wonderfull if the ABC did what it was designed for, a public service and this is the exact time we need it to be that.
It will be interesting to see what happens, my guess is all channels, full of reporters opinions of the virus and parroting each other endlessly.


----------



## MovingAverage (25 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> full of reporters opinions of the virus and parroting each other endlessly.



 that is what a dumbed down society wants


----------



## macca (25 March 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Wouldn't it be wonderfull if the ABC did what it was designed for, a public service and this is the exact time we need it to be that.
> It will be interesting to see what happens, my guess is all channels, full of reporters opinions of the virus and parroting each other endlessly.




All of whom will be criticizing right wing governments and praising the opposite side and extolling the wonders of those kind considerate people in charge of a certain germ factory somewhere in Asia


----------



## IFocus (25 March 2020)

Sigh....."Dr Norman Swan"


----------



## MovingAverage (25 March 2020)

macca said:


> All of whom will be criticizing right wing governments and praising the opposite side and extolling the wonders of those kind considerate people in charge of a certain germ factory somewhere in Asia




You suggesting that the ABC has a lefty agenda....gee I would have never picked that


----------



## PZ99 (26 March 2020)

macca said:


> All of whom will be criticizing right wing governments and praising the opposite side and extolling the wonders of those kind considerate people in charge of a certain germ factory somewhere in Asia



Very unlikely given that right wing govts are throwing money around with...  gay abandon 

However, they will of course be immune from criticism by the right wing media regardless of how left they go... at least until Dutto aspires to lead the country again. LOL


----------



## sptrawler (1 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder if the ABC will become a public service, while the corona virus shutdown is on and concentrate on quality educational school children focused content?
> There must be plenty of free archived school level educational content available.



It looks as though they are going to put something together, which is great, it may actually motivate them to continue and build on this base.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/abc...-lessons-on-kids-channel-20200401-p54g59.html


----------



## Tink (7 April 2020)

imv
Time to privatise the ABC.
Make it subscription.


----------



## Logique (7 April 2020)

(Their) ABC as judge, jury and executioner.
And airing this program in the same week as the High Court judgement, very suspicious timing.
Well the High Court has judged that Pell is innocent.







> *Guilty: The conviction of Cardinal Pell*
> https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/guilty:-the-conviction-of-cardinal-pell/10869116
> Guilty - the conviction of Cardinal Pell, reported by Louise Milligan, [Four Corners] goes to air on Monday 4th March at 8.30pm.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

Tink said:


> imv
> Time to privatise the ABC.
> Make it subscription.



I think they are certainly heading in that direction, they are really painting themselves into a corner. IMO


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

Tink said:


> imv
> Time to privatise the ABC.
> Make it subscription.



OK... on one condition - ban all Murdoch media in this country.

We don't need another clone of prejudged hate speech undermining our democracy and replacing our Prime Ministers at will.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2020)

Privatisation of the ABC will never happen, it would be political poison.

Of course slicing their budgets year by year can be done with less political risk, up to a point.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> OK... on one condition - ban all Murdoch media in this country.
> 
> We don't need another clone of prejudged hate speech undermining our democracy and replacing our Prime Ministers at will.



I would go for banning all press, IMO they are all someones b^%$, be it advertising, politicians, big business or fringe dwelling social engineers.


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

I would go for banning all *subscription* press. I think it's wrong when they block you from accessing online articles about a national emergency unless you pay for it. By sinking that low they are merely confirming their irrelevancy to anyone with higher IQ than a sheep.


----------



## Logique (7 April 2020)

Hate speech isn't speech that you hate, it's called balance. 
I'd just like the ABC to meet it's charter. What are we paying Ita for?


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2020)

Logique said:


> Hate speech isn't speech that you hate, it's called balance.
> I'd just like the ABC to meet it's charter. What are we paying Ita for?



Exactly.

The long march through the institutions simply must be halted and a fair balance restored. I'm strongly in favour of a national broadcaster but on the proviso that it is unbiased and balanced.

the reality is that some individuals within an organisation will of course be biased one way or the other, but at least if you have a rabid left wing presenter then you should go and that out with a rabid right green presenter.

Or how's thist for an idea? How about having people from somewhere around the centre, with some balance between centre left and centre right?

F****** radical I know but that's my thoughts.


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

Logique said:


> Hate speech isn't speech that you hate, it's called balance.
> I'd just like the ABC to meet it's charter. What are we paying Ita for?



That is not correct - hate speech isn't balance - it's prejudgism - nothing more or less.


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> That is not correct - hate speech isn't balance - it's prejudgism - nothing more or less.



Oh come on, in current practice, hate speech is anything the extreme left doesn't agree with, and extremely subjective I might add.

In any case, unless there is an explicit call  to violence, purported hate speech should merely be matched with objectivism and deserved ridicule on that basis.

That is far more effective than sending truly hateful bastards underground


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

No wayne. Hate speech is hate speech... attempting to confine it to the left is just obvious bias.

...it doesn't matter whether it's left / right / upside down / pointing to or away from the media.

Why not be honest with yourself and call things for what they are - rather than what you want them to be?


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

I wonder if the ABC will run a series of programs exonerating Cardinal Pell? From what I read, they seem to have run plenty of articles and programs, during the condemning phase of the case.
I don't watch news or current affairs, but did notice on ASF at the time, there was quite a bit of debate surrounding the issue.Andrew Bolt was mentioned quite a lot.
It is strange that only 3 journo's were present to hear the ruling, I wonder if most knew what the outcome would be?
Oh well the media can move on to the next person, they want to put up on the cross of sensational reporting, in the name of public entertainment.
Very, very sad indeed.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-appeal-child-sex-abuse-convictions/12048726
From the article:
The unanimous decision has been handed down less than a month after the High Court of Australia heard two days of intense legal arguments from the Cardinal's lawyers and Victorian prosecutors.
The full bench's ruling was handed down by Chief Justice Susan Kiefel in an almost empty High Court registry in Brisbane, due to physical-distancing measures introduced in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

*The public gallery, which can seat up to 16 people, only contained three journalists to hear Chief Justice Kiefel deliver the ruling at 10:00am.*


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> *The public gallery, which can seat up to 16 people, only contained three journalists to hear Chief Justice Kiefel deliver the ruling at 10:00am.*




COVID restrictions.

Personally I think he deserved some time for what he did in moving pedophile priests around so they could continue their obnoxious pastime, but that wasn't what he was charged with. 

There was always too much doubt in my mind that he had the opportunity to do what was alleged, and conviction by allegation alone is disturbing.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> There was always too much doubt in my mind that he had the opportunity to do what was alleged, and conviction by allegation alone is disturbing.



The problem is IMO, trail by media is becoming the norm, disturbing is understating it.
Just my opinion.


----------



## IFocus (7 April 2020)

Extraordinary comments re the most trusted media outlet in Australia, however I am likely to agree as Insiders last Sunday was run entirely by serving or ex serving Murdoch journalists some thing noted by themselves.

Is this is imbalanced opinion?

Crickets...........


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

IFocus said:


> Extraordinary comments re the most trusted media outlet in Australia.
> 
> Crickets...........



I can only agree with that, as IMO, it shows how low the bar has been dropped.


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> No wayne. Hate speech is hate speech... attempting to confine it to the left is just obvious bias.
> 
> ...it doesn't matter whether it's left / right / upside down / pointing to or away from the media.
> 
> Why not be honest with yourself and call things for what they are - rather than what you want them to be?




Agree with you, *because you missed my point. 

When my eye muscles have recovered from excessive rolling, I'll 'splain.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> OK... on one condition - ban all Murdoch media in this country.
> 
> We don't need another clone of prejudged hate speech undermining our democracy and replacing our Prime Ministers at will.



What you mean like Tony Abbott? Oh sorry that was Fairfax, my bad.


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

Tony Abbott shirtfronted himself out of the job in record time IMO

His banning of frontbench ministers on Q/A + his role in the Turnbull removal was a classic case of "my way or the highway" and adds to my claim about prejudged views passing off as "balance".

But now the country is spiraling towards going broke, the ABC will probably be privatised pretty quick so I reckon tell Murdoch to buzz off by sending him a tax invoice akin to the total value of his company. After all it's not a media outlet it's a political party.


----------



## Humid (7 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> The problem is IMO, trail by media is becoming the norm, disturbing is understating it.
> Just my opinion.




And the jury?
Only for paupers


----------



## qldfrog (7 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> What you mean like Tony Abbott? Oh sorry that was Fairfax, my bad.



I think @PZ99  was referring to the replacement of Rudd by Gillard under the pressure of the unions


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> His banning of frontbench ministers on Q/A + his role in the Turnbull removal was a classic case of "my way or the highway" and adds to my claim about prejudged views passing off as "balance".
> .



Would that be the Turnbull that knifed Brendan Nelson and Abbott.

Love it, I wouldn't be surprised if Turnbull doesn't run for a Labor seat, Fairfax would fund it for sure.

By the way, great to see a bit of volatility, it has been way too staid for some time.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

qldfrog said:


> I think @PZ99  was referring to the replacement of Rudd by Gillard under the pressure of the unions



Yep that was a classic, Hi I'm Kev I'm here to help, then it was F%^k off Kev, then it was where the F^&k is Kev? Julia's imploded.


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

qldfrog said:


> I think @PZ99  was referring to the replacement of Rudd by Gillard under the pressure of the unions




Haha - the mining companies and an obstructionist opposition more like it...

Remember this ?


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Would that be the Turnbull that knifed Brendan Nelson and Abbott.
> 
> Love it, I wouldn't be surprised if Turnbull doesn't run for a Labor seat, Fairfax would fund it for sure.
> 
> By the way, great to see a bit of volatility, it has been way too staid for some time.




Yep that would that be the Turnbull that was knifed *by* Abbott.... twice


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Yep that would that be the Turnbull that was knifed *by* Abbott.... twice



So all is square.
There isn't many in politics IMO, that can take the moral high ground, some that come to mind are Allan Carpenter W.A Labor, man of principles that stood by them and then resigned.
Charlie Court W.A, put the State first before anything.
Collin Barnett same as above.
Gough Whitlam put people before the economy and made workers realise they can get paid more, put a bomb under establishment and has always been underrated.
Tony Abbott, wore his heart on his sleeve, was never articulate enough, said it as it was, blew his feet of several times, lived by the sword died by the sword.
I can't think of many other memorable politicians in my lifetime.
Some great showmen have had go, but at the end of the day it was about them not about Australia. Just my opinion.


----------



## PZ99 (7 April 2020)

That's fair enough but I'm not making this an anti Abbott rant.

What I disagree with, is the Murdoch media directly undermining our democracy.

A massive campaign against Rudd in 2013 another one against Turnbull in 2018 and a dishonest one against Pauline Hanson a few years ago - they posted soft pr0n pics of her in the paper before an election which turned out to be fake afterwards...

And yet people wanna sook about the ABC.

I think the ulterior motive by the right is to just not have any form of state owned media - it's not their lexicon - so it doesn't matter who they put in charge of the ABC - it will always face vexatious claims about bias. Even if Tony Abbott himself was running the thing it would still be looked upon as a virtue signalling extreme left social engineering outlet.

You just can't please some people


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> That's fair enough but I'm not making this an anti Abbott rant.
> 
> What I disagree with, is the Murdoch media directly undermining our democracy.
> 
> ...



Don't disagree with you at all and as I've said endlessly the wife and I don't watch any T.V other than what she records, which is crime shows NCIS etc, Judge Judy and Bargain Hunt.
I would watch more, but don't because the white noise in the background, isn't worth it.
So I just read the internet, I'm not on facebook or anything like that, ASF and a car forum is it.
So all I know is what is available online, so what i will say is, the SMH etc got rid of Abbott and installed Turnbull, but he obviously was out of step with the Party.
Rudd was a great showman in the right place at the right time, Howard was well past his use by date, but Rudd wanted to be bigger than his missus and his head blew up when he achieved it.
I can't access Murdoch press because it is firewalled, so I don't know what they have to say, except for the headlines.


----------



## macca (8 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> Don't disagree with you at all and as I've said endlessly the wife and I don't watch any T.V other than what she records, which is crime shows NCIS etc, Judge Judy and Bargain Hunt.
> I would watch more, but don't because the white noise in the background, isn't worth it.
> So I just read the internet, I'm not on facebook or anything like that, ASF and a car forum is it.
> So all I know is what is available online, so what i will say is, the SMH etc got rid of Abbott and installed Turnbull, but he obviously was out of step with the Party.
> ...




SP,

Here in NSW the Daily Telegraph is firewalled but at present New.com.au is not

https://www.news.com.au/

I read that, the ABC and Fairfax at SMH plus Yahoo news, quite interesting looking at all the different spins


----------



## PZ99 (8 April 2020)

I use google news - which sometimes bypasses paywalls. 

I posted an article in another thread without even knowing it was paywalled. Strange setup.


----------



## IFocus (8 April 2020)

Read the Australian most days and they do have some fine journalists but the political commentary is pure comedy.

Some of the convoluted logic praising conservative actions just defies the imagination and for entertainment reading the unhinged comments often makes me wonder what Australia has become.


----------



## sptrawler (8 April 2020)

macca said:


> SP,
> 
> Here in NSW the Daily Telegraph is firewalled but at present New.com.au is not
> 
> ...



That works great macca, cheers. I only had the Australian bookmarked, but could never get to the articles, thanks for the heads up it will be a bit of a change from SMH and ABC.


----------



## basilio (8 April 2020)

Welcome to the Chinese ABC.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/chinese/


----------



## sptrawler (8 April 2020)

basilio said:


> Welcome to the Chinese ABC.
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/chinese/



Might as well, they just about own us anyway.


----------



## qldfrog (8 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Haha - the mining companies and an obstructionist opposition more like it...
> 
> Remember this ?




easy to rewrite history isn't it;
Union were against Rudd after he threatened their power within Labour.
Even if not Labour myself, Rudd dared to have party members have a voice, not the unions and factions..
He was then on the go
Being Labour, he was opposed anyway by big business and that was clear and known.The unions stabbing him in the back was the surprise...and the start of PM backstabbing which carried on to this date,,,,
but sure Rudd was pushed by the mining lobby....with a BIG help from the unions...


----------



## PZ99 (8 April 2020)

qldfrog said:


> easy to rewrite history isn't it;
> Union were against Rudd after he threatened their power within Labour.
> Even if not Labour myself, Rudd dared to have party members have a voice, not the unions and factions..
> He was then on the go
> Being Labour, he was opposed anyway by big business and that was clear and known.The unions stabbing him in the back was the surprise...and the start of PM backstabbing which carried on to this date,,,,





> but sure Rudd was pushed by the mining lobby....with a BIG help from the unions...



I agree with your last sentence which is why history isn't being rewritten.

The dominant Labor right undermined Rudd but the mining tax was the trigger for a slump in the polls and opened the door for the backstabbing. No wonder the revised tax brought in no revenue - it was designed by the mining lobby 

But again, my point.. which is easily avoided... is the role of Murdoch media directly undermining our democracy in the three cases I listed previously. All this whilst owning us billions in tax.

People ask why their taxes support the ABC if it doesn't support their political dispositions.

I ask why my taxes are supporting an A-Grade tax avoider with a grudge against anyone who disagrees with his special form of anti left / pro right dogma.

So I stand by my original comment - if you want to privatise the ABC get rid of Murdoch first.

You'll save us all from two drains on our tax revenue.


----------



## qldfrog (8 April 2020)

OK cf Rudd..and BTW, I favor a proper mining tax, joining environmental real protection by taxing dirt moved and not only end product to avoid "raping" of resources..I worked in mining for a long time and could explain you what I mean if you want
Except Fox news which is an American crap as much as CNN is and not relevant to Australia, what do you think is the importance of Murdoch media here??
I wish I could get some right views:
here in qld, courier mail, Brisbane  Times are the only 2 media I can watch outside ABC or  News limited .

News ltd does not ALWAYS bash the right but it is still full on globalist and global warming focus with a socialist view on the economy.
So what is the importance of your nemesis??
Another past hang up I think


----------



## PZ99 (8 April 2020)

It's all laid out in my previous two posts. Avoiding tax and actively trolling our political system for personal gain is not the sort of thing I want my taxes supporting. That whole dirty process of undermining the Turnbull Govt kinda made me sick and it's not even a Govt I would've voted for.

It makes me sick because it's akin to having myopic views shoved down my throat and anyone who disagrees with it is automatically inferior. Trampling on others to amass a fortune is one thing.

Star Wars Darth Vader wannabees from within the Corporatocracy who were born with money and think of themselves as born to rule is dangerous in the extreme.

Murdoch doesn't own this country - we do.


----------



## sptrawler (12 April 2020)

I just saw a headline, Why the ABC coverage of Cardinal Pells wasnt a witch hunt?
Funny thing to say IMO.


----------



## sptrawler (12 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> It's all laid out in my previous two posts. Avoiding tax and actively trolling our political system for personal gain is not the sort of thing I want my taxes supporting. That whole dirty process of undermining the Turnbull Govt kinda made me sick and it's not even a Govt I would've voted for.
> 
> It makes me sick because it's akin to having myopic views shoved down my throat and anyone who disagrees with it is automatically inferior. Trampling on others to amass a fortune is one thing.
> 
> ...



I think all the media do it. To say one is worse than another is flawed, just because one side aligns more with your beliefs, doesnt make it more virtuous.


----------



## PZ99 (12 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I think all the media do it. To say one is worse than another is flawed, just because one side aligns more with your beliefs, doesnt make it more virtuous.



I don't have beliefs - I just fry the biggest fish


----------



## sptrawler (13 April 2020)

PZ99 said:


> I don't have beliefs - I just fry the biggest fish



I dont have a problem with that, just that it seems to be one media gets fried and I dont read it, so maybe it is justified.
 All Im saying is the only media I can read, which is Fairfax, seems pretty one sided.
I remember posting at the beginning of this pandemic, that I thought it was pretty outrageous that a media announcement should start with, have we got the Government we deserve, because the Government hadnt called for a complete lockdown.
That wasnt done by Murdoch media, so like I say it isnt a one way street.
People need to become independent thinkers IMO.


----------



## PZ99 (13 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I dont have a problem with that, just that it seems to be one media gets fried and I dont read it, so maybe it is justified.
> All Im saying is the only media I can read, which is Fairfax, seems pretty one sided.
> I remember posting at the beginning of this pandemic, that I thought it was pretty outrageous that a media announcement should start with, have we got the Government we deserve, because the Government hadnt called for a complete lockdown.
> That wasnt done by Murdoch media, so like I say it isnt a one way street.
> People need to become independent thinkers IMO.



Independent thinking is something I've always advocated on ASF starting with SSM and ending with cursory glances and disagreement with sycophantry views governing conspiracy theories...

That's why I go with Google News - it samples articles from all 4 corners


----------



## sptrawler (13 April 2020)

I wonder how long it will be, before George Pells takes someone to Court, over the whole incarceration incident?


----------



## Humid (13 April 2020)

Still waiting for the suppressed parts from the RC


----------



## sptrawler (13 April 2020)

Humid said:


> Still waiting for the suppressed parts from the RC



Getting chucked in the can for 12 months, then having the whole case thrown on miscarriage of justice, it will be interesting.


----------



## Tink (15 April 2020)

Cardinal George Pell says he believes "culture wars" and his conservative views on social issues contributed to him being prosecuted and jailed on child sexual abuse charges — convictions that were overturned by the nation's highest court last week.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-14/cardinal-george-pell-andrew-bolt-sky-news-interview/12146594

---

_https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...al-responses-to-child-sex-abuse.30785/page-26_


----------



## sptrawler (15 April 2020)

Tink said:


> Cardinal George Pell says he believes "culture wars" and his conservative views on social issues contributed to him being prosecuted



I suppose the way Margaret Court and Israel Folau were treated falls under the auspices, but instead of prosecuted, they were persecuted.
Just my opinion


----------



## sptrawler (15 April 2020)

I just saw this article on the ABC website and thought this typifies the problem the media have, when Morrison was away on holidays at the outbreaks of the bushfires, the media said he should be here and didn't let upon it for a long time after he rushed home.
When in actual fact bushfires and bushfire departments are a State function.

Now today this article.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...tion-schools-scott-morrison-response/12149984
From the article:
_Seated in the Prime Minister's office with the Australian flag behind him, it was not the teachers or families mentioned in his video that Scott Morrison needed to convince.
_
*As he stared down the barrel of the camera on Wednesday morning appealing for schools to remain open, some — including the state education ministers — likely saw something else: an attempt to use the bully pulpit of the Prime Minister's office to have them fall in line*.

So on one hand he is condemned for not being here to influence the States and on the other he is criticised for trying to influence the States.

Is there any wonder people are becoming disenfranchised and confused with the media, I just hope they all go broke, because the last thing they appear to want to do is report a balanced two sided view?
Maybe it is all about influencing people today, by some of the posts on here, they probably do a good job.
Whether the silent majority swallow it is another thing IMO.


----------



## IFocus (16 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I suppose the way Margaret Court and Israel Folau were treated falls under the auspices, but instead of prosecuted, they were persecuted.
> Just my opinion





Afraid not two of them have been criticized because of their public opinions of vulnerable minority groups in our society.
One of them for their behavior regarding pedophile priests and charges stemming from a witness whose testimony was not challenged but was found not guily on appeal due to the likey hood of the circumstances.


----------



## Tink (16 April 2020)

paedophile

_a person who is sexually attracted to children_


----------



## sptrawler (16 April 2020)

IFocus said:


> Afraid not two of them have been criticized because of their public opinions of vulnerable minority groups in our society.
> One of them for their behavior regarding pedophile priests and charges stemming from a witness whose testimony was not challenged but was found not guily on appeal due to the likey hood of the circumstances.



Publicly criticised due to their personal beliefs, it is only my opinion, but that to me qualifies as persecution.

But these days it seems to depend who has the opinion and who the press deem fit to persecute, Court and Folau were persecuted.

Neither of them have been accused of anything to do with children, but as with most things people jump to conclusions without reading what was said, this is based on their own perception of what they want to believe was said.

Just my opinion and I don't mind being persecuted.

Persecution:

hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs.


----------



## sptrawler (16 April 2020)

sptrawler said:


> I just saw this article on the ABC website and thought this typifies the problem the media have, when Morrison was away on holidays at the outbreaks of the bushfires, the media said he should be here and didn't let upon it for a long time after he rushed home.
> When in actual fact bushfires and bushfire departments are a State function.
> .



Here is another example of the P.M meaning well, but what he is calling for he can't invoke because it is a State function, so what the press should really do is lay responsibility where it really belongs when being critical. (this article is only for example purposes)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...-to-know-about-payment-and-evictions/12151188
From the article:
_Australia's 8 million residential renters remain in limbo as governments sew together a meagre patchwork of laws that leave both tenants and landlords with questions and growing problems.

Despite Prime Minister Scott Morrison declaring a six-month "eviction ban" in late March, *it's merely a slogan until each state and territory parliament passes bills to make it law. Fewer than half have.*

Tenants in financial trouble are urged to negotiate a rent reduction with their landlords, but there's no Plan B for if the landlord refuses_.

Sometimes I think journalists don't understand how a Federation works, or chose to ignore how it works, to put their spin on things.


----------



## Tink (16 May 2020)




----------



## Tink (7 June 2020)




----------



## PZ99 (8 June 2020)

Tink said:


>




How does this make the ABC political ?

Potential $10m in fines returned to the law abiding taxpayer. What's not to like ?


----------



## Dona Ferentes (24 June 2020)

250 jobs to go. Culling the 7:45am News. Will retain the overpaid muppets opining away


----------



## Chronos-Plutus (24 June 2020)

Dona Ferentes said:


> 250 jobs to go. Culling the 7:45am News. Will retain the overpaid muppets opining away



The only show worth saving at the ABC is Landline; in my opinion.


----------



## IFocus (25 June 2020)

When you have the most trusted news service in Australia what do you do as a government.........kill the news service of course.

May the rorts continue unabated.

Fascists state and you are all cheering them on.

We all need to watch Fox for the truth.


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2020)

IFocus said:


> When you have the most trusted news service in Australia what do you do as a government.........kill the news service of course.
> 
> May the rorts continue unabated.
> 
> ...





Most trusted?????  Most biased - Yes!!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2020)

As biased as the ABC may be (and I don't think it's all that biased), it's still not as biased as the commercial media.

As far as TV is concerned, the ABC shows very few entertainment programs that are of interest to me, my main viewing is News24 which I reckon is ok , although a bit repetitive and generally dumbed down.

Maybe the ABC should  ditch entertainment and let the public dine on and probably choke on things like Masterchef, and Celebrity get me out of here's and concentrate on investigative journalism and more educational programs.


----------



## wayneL (25 June 2020)

IFocus said:


> When you have the most trusted news service in Australia what do you do as a government.........kill the news service of course.
> 
> May the rorts continue unabated.
> 
> ...



I don't trust any mainstream news source, they are all biased.... And leaving aside the commercial stations, the ABC has been caught out misrepresenting the truth so many times it's ridiculous.

It is hard not to be biased. of course the commercial stations are biased they have an agenda. but the contention that the ABC is unbiased is absolutely laughable.

Twitter is actually better, you know what everyone's biases are and if you really want to get somewhere remotely close to the truth, with a little bit of digging you can find it there... And note I said "somewhere remotely close".


----------



## Klogg (25 June 2020)

IFocus said:


> When you have the most trusted news service in Australia what do you do as a government.........kill the news service of course.
> 
> May the rorts continue unabated.
> 
> ...




It's not as simple as The ABC is good or bad.

Their News service is great. They tend to report on fact, and proved their value during the bushfire crisis, as others mentioned.

Then there's absolute crap like Q&A, or some ridiculous crap on gender fluidity (which totally ignores science), or even their Marxist views on how some races get uneven outcomes so we must all be racist. 

If they cut the ABC back to just news, they'll have done the country a favour. But if you get rid of the news too, then we're left with really poor journalism.


----------



## Klogg (25 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> I don't trust any mainstream news source, they are all biased.... And leaving aside the commercial stations, the ABC has been caught out misrepresenting the truth so many times it's ridiculous.
> 
> It is hard not to be biased. of course the commercial stations are biased they have an agenda. but the contention that the ABC is unbiased is absolutely laughable.
> 
> Twitter is actually better, you know what everyone's biases are and if you really want to get somewhere remotely close to the truth, with a little bit of digging you can find it there... And note I said "somewhere remotely close".




Have to disagree on the Twitter comment. If you want a place where every third person is posting rude, hate-filled responses, go there. To add to the problem, you can't have a decent discussion, because you're limited to 140 characters (or w.e the current limit is).

I couldn't think of anything worse for one's mental health.


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2020)

Klogg said:


> I couldn't think of anything worse for one's mental health.




Good point.

2020, living in the fast lane.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 June 2020)

Klogg said:


> Then there's absolute crap like Q&A,




QandA is a lot better without the barracking audience.


----------



## dutchie (25 June 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> QandA is a lot better without the barracking audience.



True (even if I haven't watched it for ages,  lol).  Now if they could just even out the panelists........


----------



## wayneL (25 June 2020)

Klogg said:


> Have to disagree on the Twitter comment. If you want a place where every third person is posting rude, hate-filled responses, go there. To add to the problem, you can't have a decent discussion, because you're limited to 140 characters (or w.e the current limit is).
> 
> I couldn't think of anything worse for one's mental health.




Ohhh. Yes I certainly do agree with you on that!!

I do limit myself as far as possible to the fintwit community. If I cross over for news
I limit myself to sensible voices on both sides.... You really HAVE to manage  it that way for sure.


----------



## IFocus (25 June 2020)

You are all supporting a Stalinist state where the news has to tow the line, as long as government MP's  and commercial interests attack the ABC you know they are doing it right.

Most trusted news source in Australia by a massive %.

Keep cheering everyone you will soon be goose steeping.


----------



## bellenuit (25 June 2020)

IFocus said:


> .... as long as government MP's  and commercial interests attack the ABC you know they are doing it right.




That is not a good criterium for assessing whether they are doing it right. That would also be the case if they were a biased left wing media organisation.


----------



## PZ99 (25 June 2020)

I'm yet to see any fair criterium for assessing how they're doing it wrong. 

Cherry picking bits where they report a Govt stuff up or bad polling doesn't do it for me


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2020)

The same statements could be said about news corp.
I dont follow any of them, just follow the observations made on this forum.
Those who say the ABC isnt biased say news corp is and vice versa.
Which I suppose verifies, that both are.


----------



## PZ99 (25 June 2020)

The difference IMV is assertions of ABC bias is based on it being owned by the state which is the anathema of private enterprise devotees. So their narrative won't change until it's sold regardless of the on-air content.

Newscorp is a Conservative aligned political party masquerading as a media outlet with a history of bias and corruption so intense that it's getting hoisted by its own petard resulting in job losses all over the country as local journalism goes down the swanny.





It happens


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2020)

I dont care who owns it, some say t he ABC is biased, I dont watch it, some say news or sky is biased I dont watch it.
But both sides say exactly the same, about the other.
So I guess just reading between the lines on asf, saves me a lot of angst.
With regard the ABC, the Labor Party is always saying how wonderfull it is, the coalition is always complaining.
With regard newscorp, the Labor party is always complaining about it.
So I guess there is some sort of balance.


----------



## PZ99 (25 June 2020)

Well I think it'll be a moot point eventually anyway. Newscorp will spiral into irrelevancy and probably go broke and the ABC will probably be sold off sometime after that.

The Guardian will then be bought by the Greens if Malcolm Turnbull takes over their leadership


----------



## sptrawler (26 June 2020)

PZ99 said:


> Well I think it'll be a moot point eventually anyway. Newscorp will spiral into irrelevancy and probably go broke and the ABC will probably be sold off sometime after that.
> 
> The Guardian will then be bought by the Greens if Malcolm Turnbull takes over their leadership



And there will be peace and happiness at the bottom of the garden.
The problem is, the media is fixated on sensational news, that entails having opposing opinions.
The issue with that is, they have to guess what the majority of readers or viewers believe, and has been proven recently the majority aren't outspoken.
The ones that are outspoken fall into two groups, the left that hate capitalism, hate the U.S, hate fossil fuel, but in reality avail themselves of all it offers and enables them to hate it,
The far right, they just want to beat the crap out of those, that want to deprive them of their right to go to the pub and have a beano.
Then you have the rest, who are just trying to make ends meet and are wondering why there has to be so many idiots out there trying to upset the apple cart.
The problem at the moment is, the media is way out of step, of those who just want to get on with life.
The reason being, the media people are paid way too much money, to have any idea of what the rest are feeling so they pick a side.
Just my opinion.


----------



## wayneL (26 June 2020)

There is nothing conservative about newscorp. They are a corporatist tabloid org that plays both sides


----------



## qldfrog (26 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> There is nothing conservative about newscorp. They are a corporatist tabloid org that plays both sides



Exactly, they just follow the market
See how they run with caricatural images of Abbots or follow on the anti Trump rants etc
If News ltd is  right wing in their Australian site, then Stalin is a centrist
They do not care about opinion just the number of hits. So if the majority of people thinks one way, they will follow..
That is right wing for the guardians mobs......
Pathetic journalism i agree  but no bias but money which i actually prefer to ABC agenda
And at least, i am not paying for it whereas the ABC...
Let ABC be News 24, and shows like landline, gardening Australia and bbc rediffusions : midsummers murders  etc for this audience


----------



## SirRumpole (26 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> There is nothing conservative about newscorp. They are a corporatist tabloid org that plays both sides




Newscorp is fundamentally conservative and will barrack that way as long as they can, but if it looks like Labor is going to win they will switch sides then claim the credit later on.


----------



## PZ99 (26 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> There is nothing conservative about newscorp. They are a corporatist tabloid org that plays both sides



Nah....


----------



## wayneL (26 June 2020)

In my opinion the Murdochs have sandcastle syndrome.

Continuously building up just to tear it the hell down again. I see this election after election after election, in country after country.


----------



## PZ99 (26 June 2020)

wayneL said:


> In my opinion the Murdochs have sandcastle syndrome.
> 
> Continuously building up just to tear it the hell down again. I see this election after election after election, in country after country.



Yep


----------



## DB008 (11 September 2020)

I think there is Chinese influence at the ABC.

They are publishing bleeding heart stories about China. ABC now knows more than ASIO/ASIS. What a joke...


*Western Sydney University provided letter of 'support'*
*to ASIO for banned Chinese PhD Student*​Western Sydney University provided a character reference to ASIO for leading Chinese scholar and current WSU doctoral student Li Jianjun after the spy agency cancelled his student visa.

The university has also expressed support for Mr Li in a video message to Chinese students from Vice-Chancellor Barney Glover.

"The university is supporting the student in requesting the reconsideration of the decision to cancel the student visa."

*The university says it doesn't know what evidence ASIO'S Director-General relied on when the agency assessed Mr Li as a possible security risk.*

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-11/western-sydney-university-character-reference-li/12652722​

Thats because you don't have security clearances.

Meanwhile...


*US cancels 1,000 China student visas, claiming ties to military*​State department has been revoking visas since 1 June after Trump order to tackle intellectual property theft

The US has revoked the visas of more than 1,000 Chinese students and researchers it said had ties to the Chinese military, accusing some of espionage, in the latest dispute between the rival superpowers.

China had been “abusing student visas to exploit American academia”, said Chad Wolf, acting secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, in a speech on Wednesday. “We are blocking visas for certain Chinese graduate students and researchers with ties to China’s military fusion strategy to prevent them from stealing and otherwise appropriating sensitive research.”

It follows a proclamation in late May from President Donald Trump that “certain graduate level and above Chinese nationals associated with entities in China” that support or work with the Chinese military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) would be blocked from entering the US. He said Chinese nationals studying in the US had stolen intellectual property and assisted the PLA.​https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...china-student-visas-claiming-ties-to-military​


*Mystery surrounds ouster of Chinese researchers*
*from Canadian laboratory*​Canadian researchers are reacting with puzzlement to the news that a “policy breach” has caused the nation’s only high-containment disease laboratory to bar a prominent Chinese Canadian virologist, her biologist husband, and a number of students from the facility.

On 5 July, officials at the National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) in Winnipeg, Canada, escorted Xiangguo Qiu, biologist Keding Cheng, and an unknown number of her students from the lab and revoked their access rights, according to Canadian media reports. The Public Health Agency of Canada, which operates the lab, confirmed it had referred an “administrative matter” matter to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but said it would not provide additional details because of privacy concerns.

A number of observers have speculated that case involves concerns about the improper transfer of intellectual property to China. (All of the researchers involved are believed to be Asian.) But Frank Plummer, a former scientific director of NML who left in 2015, says the lab isn’t an obvious target for academic or industrial espionage. “There is nothing highly secret there, and all the work gets published in the open literature,” he says. “I don’t know what anyone would hope to gain by spying.”

The lab works in a wide range of biomedical fields. Qiu is known for helping develop ZMapp, a treatment for Ebola virus that was fast-tracked through development during the 2014–16 outbreak in West Africa. She has repeatedly been honored for her work on that project, including with a Governor General’s Innovation Award last year.

“While I was there [Qiu] was always highly regarded as a scientist,” says Plummer, adding that he was “shocked and puzzled” when he heard she was being investigated. “She maintained connections with China, but as far as I knew she was a regular Canadian scientist.”

Cheng, Qiu’s husband, also worked as a biologist at NML. And both researchers held adjunct faculty positions at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg. It says it has terminated their positions and reassigned their students as a result of the investigation.

Neither Qiu nor Cheng could be reached for comment.​
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...uster-chinese-researchers-canadian-laboratory​


This has been going on for years. Chinese stealing everything they can. Almost like a parasite.



.​


----------



## Knobby22 (11 September 2020)

It's called reporting what's happening DB008. None of those articles are pro China. The fact the university state they don't know why is reported. That is not pro China, that's just telling the facts.

You won't see much of this from Newcorp as they have interests in China they don't want to upset.
And if you doubt that, show me where I am wrong, maybe the scales will fall off your eyes.

Example of the most recent (sucking up to) China article from Sky news  follows:

*Xi Jinping hands out medals while praising China’s COVID-19 response*
08/09/2020|1min

Currently in China they’re handing out medals to those who were able to “successfully kill off the virus” according to Sky News host Paul Murray. “While you right now have the police state in Victoria, you have the curfew that the chief medical officer didn’t ask for, you have the premier pretending that the second wave isn’t really the fault of hotel quarantine,” Mr Murray said. “In China they’re handing out medals”. In the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China’s President Xi Jinping handed medals out and praised the efforts of those involved in combatting the deadly virus, which has now claimed nearly 900,000 lives worldwide. “Medals in Beijing, curfew in Melbourne," Mr Murray said.

*China accuses Australia of 'white terror' crackdown against Chinese journalists*
10/09/2020|4min


China has accused Australia of “horrific persecution” and committing a “white terror” crackdown against Chinese journalists. In an article published in a mouthpiece for the Chinese government, the Global Times warned it was becoming “infuriated” by Australia’s “witch hunt campaign”. “The witch hunt campaign under the excuse of investigating the so-called Chinese infiltration, promoted by Australian security departments, is getting infuriating,” the mouthpiece said. “Australia's so-called freedom of the press and freedom of speech have become a complete joke.”

Why does Sky News make no pro Australian commentary??

Luckily we still have our state media.


----------



## DB008 (14 October 2020)

The Guardian too - and they ain't hiding it in the lead up to the NZ election.

Check out this headline...





https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...w-zealands-anti-ardern-whose-hero-is-thatcher

Imagine the outrage if the headline was "Ardern's hero is Karl Marx"...


----------



## SirRumpole (14 October 2020)

DB008 said:


> Imagine the outrage if the headline was "Ardern's hero is Karl Marx"...




Is he ?

Anyway, Josh Friedenberg admitted to the same. It's not biased if you repeat what people say


----------



## PZ99 (15 October 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Is he ?



In the absence of proof..... nope 

About as credible as using a guardian article to say the ABC is political. And who reads the guardian anyway ?



Spoiler



“What I liked about Mrs Thatcher, never having met her, is that she revelled in dealing with adversity and she didn’t give in,”



They could have just as easily said "one of Collins political heroes is Hillary Clinton"

It would be just as accurate.


----------



## sptrawler (26 January 2021)

Interesting article in Macrobusiness, they are usually pretty left leaning, so an interesting take on the ABC from them.
I personally would prefer 'cancel Australia day altogether (it obviously offends people and causes divisiveness and incorporate it into new years day, new start and all that), ban the order of Australia medals (it just tells most average Australians they are a failure and should try harder), wean the ABC of public funding (it really is a dying medium and as just becoming a culture modelling agency)  .









						Shift Australia Day, ban Margaret Court, and shut radicalised ABC
					

Let’s shift Australia Day. It was only ever a marketing exercise and the symbolism of the date is all wrong in a modern multicultural nation. Margaret Court should not be given honours after she endorsed bigotry publicly. She has the right to speak out but must take responsibility for her views...




					www.macrobusiness.com.au


----------



## SirRumpole (26 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting article in Macrobusiness, they are usually pretty left leaning, so an interesting take on the ABC from them.
> I personally would prefer 'cancel Australia day altogether (it obviously offends people and causes divisiveness and incorporate it into new years day, new start and all that), ban the order of Australia medals (it just tells most average Australians they are a failure and should try harder), wean the ABC of public funding (it really is a dying medium and as just becoming a culture modelling agency)  .
> 
> 
> ...




I think I'd prefer to tell the ABC to stick to it's charter. Give the public news and information, education, investigative journalism, and behind the scenes analysis, rather than being a mouthpiece for every offended minority group.

And all the silly ads on the ABC these days are intrusive. Almost as bad as the commies.


----------



## sptrawler (26 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I think I'd prefer to tell the ABC to stick to it's charter. Give the public news and information, education, investigative journalism, and behind the scenes analysis, rather than being a mouthpiece for every offended minority group.
> 
> And all the silly ads on the ABC these days are intrusive. Almost as bad as the commies.



I wouldn't mind a dollar for every time I've heard the ABC should stick to its charter, it has just become as you say a mouthpiece for minority groups with content written by university trained minority groups.
It is a bit like Kerry O'Brian the ex ABC journo, saying he wont accept the award because Margaret Court received one when she is divisive with her opinion, yet he as a reporter was as divisive as the best of them.
People and there opinions, which are usually underpinned by their own over inflated sense of self importance, what a hoot. 😂
It is like Malcolm Turnbull and his ghost stories, now he has become head ghost. 😜


----------



## sptrawler (26 January 2021)

Another example of the same hypocrisy, it's a shame Kerry wasn't still working. 
Only the ABC are allowed to be deeply insensitive, disrespectful and divisive, but hey it is only national television.😂




__





						NoCookies | The Australian
					






					www.theaustralian.com.au
				



From the article:
An ABC reporter has been lashed on social media for speaking during a minute’s silence at an Invasion Day rally in Hobart.


----------



## sptrawler (29 January 2021)

Well in my opinion Mark McGowan will romp in the W.A election, but just in case the ABC seem to be starting a witch hunt , much like the Margaret Court fiasco.








						WA Liberal leader blocks questions on election candidate's views on homosexuality
					

WA Opposition Leader Zak Kirkup refuses to let one of his candidates answer questions about her views on homosexuality at a press conference just a day after another candidate was forced to resign over her views on 5G and coronavirus.




					www.abc.net.au
				



From the article:
_WA Opposition Leader Zak Kirkup has prevented the media from questioning one of his candidates about her views on homosexuality at a press conference, just a day after another candidate was forced to resign over her views on 5G and coronavirus.
One day after Liberal Party candidate Andrea Tokaji quit over her apparent endorsement of baseless COVID-19 conspiracy theories, a journalist attempted to question the party's Victoria Park candidate Amanda-Sue Markham over her husband's writings about homosexuality.
Her pastor husband, Campbell Markham, has previously written that he "disagrees with homosexual practice", labelling it "unhealthy"_.


And the death spiral continues.
This isn't going to end well IMO.
Alienating people who have christian views, is no different to any other form of alienation, it usually ends in tears.
Just my opinion, but is alienating Christians for their beliefs any different from alienating jews, homosexuals, muslims etc for their beliefs?
I feel I'm blessed, because I'm a hetrosexual atheist. 🤪
I have one each way, when one group run down the street with pitchforks looking for Christians, I'm ok.
When the other group run down the street with pitchforks, looking for sinners I'm ok.
I'm on the fence don't give a ratz, but I do think I shouldn't be paying for the ABC, if they are going to use my money to fund one of the pitchfork crews. 👍
I just wish they would spend the money on updating the Bargain Hunt series, Endeavour , Inspector Morse etc.
Then at least my other half would be happy.
That is the problem the ABC thinks it is supplying a service, but it never asks its viewers what they want to watch, yet it is the viewers who are funding it.
All very weird.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 January 2021)

sptrawler said:


> All very weird.




And tiresome. As we have discussed before, the ABC has been PC for quite some time, feeling it has to "tell the stories" of certain groups while ignoring the middle ground.

Investigative journalism has gone out the window in most cases being replaced by propaganda.

The young journos have been trained in schools run by Left Wing unions to make sure they never offend anyone , unless it's the white male, middle / upper classes who obviously deserve everything they get, the bastards.


----------



## sptrawler (30 January 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> And tiresome. As we have discussed before, the ABC has been PC for quite some time, feeling it has to "tell the stories" of certain groups while ignoring the middle ground.
> 
> Investigative journalism has gone out the window in most cases being replaced by propaganda.
> 
> The young journos have been trained in schools run by Left Wing unions to make sure they never offend anyone , unless it's the white male, middle / upper classes who obviously deserve everything they get, the bastards.



I sometimes wonder if their obvious bias isn't orchestrated, to justify their privatisation, it is just weird.
But then again looking from another angle, if the media will end up being cable via NBN, the pay to view model really wouldn't work for the ABC not enough people watch it.
So maybe the end game is to pizz enough of the population, to make it ok to float it off, then someone else other than the taxpayer wears the cost when it goes under. 😉


----------



## SirRumpole (1 February 2021)

The ABC needs to upgrade the education of some of its reporters.

Statement on ABC news this morning.

"The Hunter valley is looking to make steel with hydrogen not coal".

Is this even technically possible ?

My research suggests that there is no way to make steel without coal at this point in time. Will there ever be one in the future ?


----------



## basilio (1 February 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC needs to upgrade the education of some of its reporters.
> 
> Statement on ABC news this morning.
> 
> ...




It is technically possible Rumpy and in fact there is a pilot steel  plant already doing so.

There is a fair way to go before it becomes cost effective but the road map exists.








						Swedish Steelmaker Uses Hydrogen Instead Of Coal To Make Fossil-Free Steel
					

Swedish company HYBRIT hopes to decarbonize an industry responsible for some 5-8% of the globe’s carbon dioxide emissions.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## SirRumpole (1 February 2021)

basilio said:


> It is technically possible Rumpy and in fact there is a pilot steel  plant already doing so.
> 
> There is a fair way to go before it becomes cost effective but the road map exists.
> 
> ...




Thanks for that bas.


I thought that steel = iron + carbon, so it's a new one on me.

I apologise to the ABC reporter.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 February 2021)

basilio said:


> It is technically possible Rumpy and in fact there is a pilot steel  plant already doing so.
> 
> There is a fair way to go before it becomes cost effective but the road map exists.[/URL]



I think the problem is that the ABC, and some other media outlets, could fairly be accused of over-reporting on the whole climate issue.

By "over-reporting" I mean presenting things as news which, whilst perhaps valid in themselves, are not actual news.

News = something happened. Something physically occurred, someone made some sort of announcement about what's going to happen or is now happening, something has been invented or discovered, someone's gone broke or whatever but "something happened".

A random article on climate change, not based on any announcement by government or business or on any new scientific information being announced, does not fit a reasonable definition of "news" even if the article has merit in itself.

Now the ABC and the Age rarely go more than a day or two without a climate change story presented as "news". Some are actual news, many are just an old story re run or are simply a general article on the subject. That's not balanced news reporting - fine if they want to publish it, just don't suggest it's news if it isn't news.

Those who've noticed this will likely tend to be a bit wary of all stories of that nature, thinking "here we go again" even if one of them actually is real news. The "boy who cried wolf" scenario at work there.

I say that as someone who's by no means in denial on the subject. It's just that I prefer news organisations to report actual news and that anything else they say, whilst fine as such, should be clearly distinguished as a feature article, opinion or whatever and not masquerade as news which it isn't.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 February 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> the ABC has been PC for quite some time, feeling it has to "tell the stories" of certain groups while ignoring the middle ground.



To be fair though, has it ever been any different?

Growing up not in a big city and family not having the $ to be traveling to one, my teenage perception of Sydney in particular came largely via the media.

First time I went there, an adult by that point, I was somewhat surprised to find that there isn't actually a drug dealer standing around every street corner and that the place isn't completely choked in smog.

The media portrayal of the city was a very long way from actual reality and in hindsight was basically a very "Left" view of the world. Normalising drug use and lamenting pollution of the air - decades later and those are still prominent themes today.

Artists, media etc have always tended to be politically Left at least from what I've seen. The ABC is often cited as an example is but go and talk to any sort of visual artists or even in music and odds are you'll find they're that way inclined politically. Exceptions as with anything but a lot seem to be.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> I think the problem is that the ABC, and some other media outlets, could fairly be accused of over-reporting on the whole climate issue.
> 
> By "over-reporting" I mean presenting things as news which, whilst perhaps valid in themselves, are not actual news.
> 
> News = something happened. Something physically occurred, someone made some sort of announcement about what's going to happen or is now happening, something has been invented or discovered, someone's gone broke or whatever but "something happened".



Yes, but I think it's also the media's job to go behind the news and provide some analysis.

The big problem there of course is that you get the analysis containing the bias of the analyst.

I was waiting for my car to be serviced the other day and read The Telegraph for the first time in years. They haven't changed, still bagging Labor and boosting Liberal. They probably give the "news", but what they don't report is often just as important as what they do report.

I'm getting really frustrated at the standard of all media these days. Even some of the ABC reporters seem just out of school, or have been employed because they fit into a certain group and struggle to put a coherent sentence together, much less to provide any insight.

The real thing missing is actual data. Of course the facts can always be fudged, but I'd like to see the media actually do the digging, present what they see as the facts, and take the risk that someone else will challenge them. If they have done their jobs properly they should be confident enough to "publish or be damned".


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Artists, media etc have always tended to be politically Left at least from what I've seen. The ABC is often cited as an example is but go and talk to any sort of visual artists or even in music and odds are you'll find they're that way inclined politically. Exceptions as with anything but a lot seem to be.




I think artists are probably Left untill they make it big time, when they start whinging about the taxes they pay.


----------



## Smurf1976 (2 February 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it's also the media's job to go behind the news and provide some analysis.



Agreed - just make it clear that's what it is, don't present it among the news headlines.

As an example, if someone ran a feature article on the stock market and put it as the headline news story with the words "STOCK MARKET CRASH" then most would be thinking that the market has in fact crashed or is crashing right now. Totally inappropriate scaremongering if it's just a background article on the share market pointing out that crashes are a thing and can occur but not referring to anything that's happening at present.

Same with any subject - it's misleading to report something as news if in fact it's just background research etc. Nothing wrong with reporting it, just don't put it in with the current news and portray it as such.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed - just make it clear that's what it is, don't present it among the news headlines.
> 
> As an example, if someone ran a feature article on the stock market and put it as the headline news story with the words "STOCK MARKET CRASH" then most would be thinking that the market has in fact crashed or is crashing right now. Totally inappropriate scaremongering if it's just a background article on the share market pointing out that crashes are a thing and can occur but not referring to anything that's happening at present.
> 
> Same with any subject - it's misleading to report something as news if in fact it's just background research etc. Nothing wrong with reporting it, just don't put it in with the current news and portray it as such.




Indeed.

 I was pondering why we get so much about climate change,arts, racism and other social subjects on the ABC and it occurred to me that people in well paid secure government jobs might have different priorities to those who have to hold down a job or run a business in difficult economic conditions.

The last election pretty well showed that the average worker is more concerned about his own financial position and his/her future prospects and those of their children rather than more peripheral issues or subjects that they feel are outside their control.

That's one thing that the Labor party hasn't cottoned onto either.


----------



## sptrawler (3 February 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed.
> 
> I was pondering why we get so much about climate change,arts, racism and other social subjects on the ABC and it occurred to me that people in well paid secure government jobs might have different priorities to those who have to hold down a job or run a business in difficult economic conditions.
> 
> ...



You have absolutely nailed it Rumpy, the ones who have so much to say, are usually those who have most to gain or little to lose, one of my mates in on a public service pension, he doesn't know what everyone is complaining about.
60% of the final average salary indexed for life, I wouldn't have complained about Shorten and Bowen, if I was on that sort of pension either.  
Workers just want to be treated fairly, if the Government wants more from them fine, as long as everyone else is doing their bit.
What really annoys workers is, working in crap conditions in some god forsaken place and then being told those on welfare are precious and the workers are lucky and should pay more.
That really does their heads in.😂


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 February 2021)

sptrawler said:


> What really annoys workers is, working in crap conditions in some god forsaken place and then being told those on welfare are precious and the workers are lucky and should pay more.
> That really does their heads in.😂



Even if the employer is excellent as such that still applies if the work involves harsh physical conditions and so on.

Manual labour jobs during a heatwave or working outdoors during winter in the rain aren't fun no matter what, there's simply no way around that and if the job has to be done well the job has to be done. On with the show.....


----------



## SirRumpole (16 April 2021)

On 15/4/2021 The ABC 7:30 program presented a report that effectively allowed itself to make serious allegations unsupported by evidence that a coronial inquest had 'got it wrong' in relation to the death of a man in Tamworth prison.

The family of the man was interviewed and the reporter said that the family "do not accept" the result of the Inquest.

So the question is, what enquiries did the ABC make before airing that story to ensure itself that the family's claims had some merit ?

No evidence was given to refute the findings of a professional coroner, the word of the family was accepted without question.

This seems yet another example of the ABC's reduction to being a provider of propaganda rather than facts, telling one side of the story without balance.

For a corporation renowned for it's 'investigative' journalism, it seems very little investigation was done for this story.

This is the program, the segment is at the 14 minute mark.

https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2101H060S00


----------



## sptrawler (16 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> On 15/4/2021 The ABC 7:30 program presented a report that effectively allowed itself to make serious allegations unsupported by evidence that a coronial inquest had 'got it wrong' in relation to the death of a man in Tamworth prison.
> 
> The family of the man was interviewed and the reporter said that the family "do not accept" the result of the Inquest.
> 
> ...



These days it seems to be about quantity, not quality and if it is anti establishment anything goes at the moment.
The media is a law unto itself these days, well that is how it appears to me and may well be the reason they find themselves in court on a quite regular basis.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> These days it seems to be about quantity, not quality and if it is anti establishment anything goes at the moment.
> The media is a law unto itself these days, well that is how it appears to me and may well be the reason they find themselves in court on a quite regular basis.




Yes, the lot of them seem to have gone feral.

The ABC sticks it into the LNP and Murdoch stick it into Labor.

Very little unbiased reporting these days.


----------



## sptrawler (16 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, the lot of them seem to have gone feral.
> 
> The ABC sticks it into the LNP and Murdoch stick it into Labor.
> 
> Very little unbiased reporting these days.



Well it sounds like the dance troupe, certainly aren't happy with the ABC exploiting them, sounds as though PC gone ape. 🤪
ABC slagging of a dance group as being seedy, lol, maybe the ABC should go to the ballet that gets raunchy, maybe take 60 minutes with them.  😂
They could probably get the ballet shut down, for exploitation of minimally clad ladies, being manhandled by dominant men with exaggerated and aggressively suggestive cod pieces. 😂  😂  😂  😂








						Sydney dancers claim ABC video of naval performance ‘amounts to upskirting’
					

A Sydney dance group vilified over a video of their performance at the commissioning of a new navy ship want a public apology from the ABC.




					www.smh.com.au


----------



## Smurf1976 (16 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well it sounds like the dance troupe, certainly aren't happy with the ABC exploiting them, sounds as though PC gone ape. 🤪



Trouble with all this is it's so trivial and pedantic that it's guaranteed to ultimately trip up everyone who gets involved with it.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 April 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> Trouble with all this is it's so trivial and pedantic that it's guaranteed to ultimately trip up everyone who gets involved with it.




I just wonder how many ABC staff have gone through journalism school and how many are just out of high school.

They seem to be having to apologise more and more these days. In the 'old' days they would have got the facts right first.


----------



## moXJO (17 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well it sounds like the dance troupe, certainly aren't happy with the ABC exploiting them, sounds as though PC gone ape. 🤪
> ABC slagging of a dance group as being seedy, lol, maybe the ABC should go to the ballet that gets raunchy, maybe take 60 minutes with them.  😂
> They could probably get the ballet shut down, for exploitation of minimally clad ladies, being manhandled by dominant men with exaggerated and aggressively suggestive cod pieces. 😂  😂  😂  😂
> 
> ...



Abc actually edited the video to make it appear certain people were watching when the in fact were not there during that time.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 April 2021)

moXJO said:


> Abc actually edited the video to make it appear certain people were watching when the in fact were not there during that time.




It's one thing to leave something out of a story, that can be just a genuine mistake in failing to include it or even intentionally needing to keep within a time constraint, but it's somewhat harder to justify adding something in that didn't occur at all.

They could have just showed footage of the ship itself, or even generic footage of Navy ships at sea, if they needed something as filler.

Media is like politics though - anyone who thinks any of them are perfect is fooling only themselves. 

As for the underlying event, it doesn't bother me in the slightest but it seems an odd way to launch a ship. Given it's a military vessel, I'd have expected a brass band and some formalities.


----------



## Humid (17 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> On 15/4/2021 The ABC 7:30 program presented a report that effectively allowed itself to make serious allegations unsupported by evidence that a coronial inquest had 'got it wrong' in relation to the death of a man in Tamworth prison.
> 
> The family of the man was interviewed and the reporter said that the family "do not accept" the result of the Inquest.
> 
> ...



Lack of funds perhaps









						Coalition's hit on the ABC: $1b and counting, while Murdoch dominates
					

A new report spells out the impact of the Coalition's continued attacks on the ABC.




					www.crikey.com.au


----------



## Humid (17 April 2021)




----------



## Smurf1976 (17 April 2021)

Humid said:


> View attachment 122901



The other parts of that trick are to remove anyone who's making it work and replace them with someone who's either actually incompetent or who'll at least toe the line.

Plus get rid of any other source of revenue that's profitable. Doesn't matter on the detail but if it's bringing money in, effectively being a workaround to the defunding, then make sure it's gotten rid of. The term used is "non-core business" and that must go.

Typically those two steps will be joined at the hip - the same people making it work will also be the ones who've driven and built up that other source of revenue.

Liberals are notorious for it but that doesn't mean Labor's immune either.


----------



## Humid (17 April 2021)

Like Oz post privatize profits like parcels and packages and let the tax payers pick up the bill for letters


----------



## sptrawler (17 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Like Oz post privatize profits like parcels and packages and let the tax payers pick up the bill for letters



Much like NBN, taxpayers upgrade the infrastructure for the telcos, so that the telcos can charge you twice as much, to provide you with the same $hit.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Much like NBN, taxpayers upgrade the infrastructure for the telcos, so that the telcos can charge you twice as much, to provide you with the same $hit.



Twice as much? you should shop around
The NBN is still owned by the commonwealth isnt it and your lot botched it in the end


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Much like NBN, taxpayers upgrade the infrastructure for the telcos, so that the telcos can charge you twice as much, to provide you with the same $hit.



Anyway how does Australia Post compare with the NBN?
What exactly did the taxpayer upgrade for private sector?


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> *The other parts of that trick are to remove anyone who's making it work and replace them with someone who's either actually incompetent or who'll at least toe the line.*
> 
> Plus get rid of any other source of revenue that's profitable. Doesn't matter on the detail but if it's bringing money in, effectively being a workaround to the defunding, then make sure it's gotten rid of. The term used is "non-core business" and that must go.
> 
> ...




Ah yes, the old "consultancy" trick.

Get rid of the staff that know the system and actually care about it and replace them with people who neither know or care.

Result, usually a complete stuff up.


----------



## rederob (18 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, the old "consultancy" trick.
> 
> Get rid of the staff that know the system and actually care about it and replace them with people who neither know or care.
> 
> Result, usually a complete stuff up.



ABC's bread and butter was news and current affairs.
They also had a lot of money for "production" - probably starting from "Bellbird" and "Uptight" in the 60s - and fostered lots of new talent and excellent comedy (I loved Clarke & Dawe).  
It seems most of their production values have left, along with their budget.
Aside from some still brilliant stuff in "4 Corners" there's not a lot to watch on Auntie anymore.
Or, maybe it's not worth watching.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2021)

They spend too much on big budget drama and hire too many sociology students that lecture us on social issues instead of telling us the facts.

Case in point, they have pointed out many times how many indigenous deaths in custody there have been in the last 30 years but have never mentioned to my knowledge the number of other deaths in custody. 

Aboriginals are about 18% of DIC which is high to be sure, but if they are going to do pieces on deaths in custody then it shouldn't be done on a racial basis.


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, the old "consultancy" trick.
> 
> Get rid of the staff that know the system and actually care about it and replace them with people who neither know or care.
> 
> Result, usually a complete stuff up.



Much like local councils IMO.


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> They spend too much on big budget drama and hire too many sociology students that lecture us on social issues instead of telling us the facts.
> 
> Case in point, they have pointed out many times how many indigenous deaths in custody there have been in the last 30 years but have never mentioned to my knowledge the number of other deaths in custody.
> 
> Aboriginals are about 18% of DIC which is high to be sure, but if they are going to do pieces on deaths in custody then it shouldn't be done on a racial basis.



Also there is never a mention, as to how high the crime rate is represented by such a small percentage of the population, there would be much less deaths in custody if they werent in custody.
Rather than saying why are indigenous dying in custody, why arent they asking, why are so many young indeginous kids commiting crimes?
Its a bit like trying to treat the symptom, rather than the desease, but I guess you arent allowed to say that these days.
Appo logies for spelling issues, on a phone.lol


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Also there is never a mention, as to how high the crime rate is represented by such a small percentage of the population, there would be much less deaths in custody if they werent in custody.
> Rather than saying why are indigenous dying in custody, why arent they asking, why are so many young indeginous kids commiting crimes?
> Its a bit like trying to treat the symptom, rather than the desease, but I guess you arent allowed to say that these days.
> Appo logies for spelling issues, on a phone.lol



Why?
Because its cheaper and easier just to lock them up
After Robodebt and the new attack on NDIS its pretty  plain to see the status quo will continue
Your perpetual whining with no genuine answer wont help boomer


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Why?
> Because its cheaper and easier just to lock them up
> After Robodebt and the new attack on NDIS its pretty  plain to see the status quo will continue
> Your perpetual whining with no genuine answer wont help boomer



Well your analysis is expected.lol
Absolutely, cant wait to see your input, when you move out of the purple patch.lol
When you are too old for the shutdowns, too old for the recruitment companies and too young for the pension. Lol
So you think the police just go around looking for people to lock up and do all the paperwork associated with it?
You really are out of touch, but at least it gives the Libs a chance, if you are representitive of the average Labor voter.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

During the pandemic with the plebs lining up for handouts at centrelink offices because the majority of people live week to week with no security in employment that the great financial managers that the libs apparently are found all this money....enough for Harvey Norman and their ilk to pay dividends to their shareholders after handouts from taxpayers for no equity.
Its a matter of wanting to fix the problem


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well your analysis is expected.lol
> Absolutely, cant wait to see your input, when you move out of the purple patch.lol
> When you are too old for the shutdowns, too old for the recruitment companies and too young for the pension. Lol



great input to be expected like Scummo all announcentbno backup


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> great input to be expected like Scummo all announcentbno backup



Havent you finished the remedial english course yet?


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well your analysis is expected.lol
> Absolutely, cant wait to see your input, when you move out of the purple patch.lol
> When you are too old for the shutdowns, too old for the recruitment companies and too young for the pension. Lol
> So you think the police just go around looking for people to lock up and do all the paperwork associated with it?
> You really are out of touch, but at least it gives the Libs a chance, if you are representitive of the average Labor voter.



If you didnt sit on your fat arse in power stations you possibly could be as fit as me.
Mate you look 70


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Havent you finished the remedial english course yet?



Apparently when your on your phone its ok


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> During the pandemic with the plebs lining up for handouts at centrelink offices because the majority of people live week to week with no security in employment that the great financial managers that the libs apparently are found all this money....enough for Harvey Norman and their ilk to pay dividends to their shareholders after handouts from taxpayers for no equity.
> Its a matter of wanting to fix the problem



Dont you have shares? If not why are you hanging around a stock forum, other than to troll?
I find it fun, because you do come up with some great one liners, but it is supposed to be a place where issues and stocks are debated, not just a place where all you want to post is political vitriol.
It isnt bad occassionaly but when it is all you post, there are probably better forums to join.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

Yeah quite a few FMG as I worked for them and they give you 1 for 1 at bonus time
But that was 10 years ago.....


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Apparently when your on your phone its ok



So what was the last word of that post,  meant to read?


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Yeah quite a few FMG as I worked for them and they give you 1 for 1 at bonus time
> But that was 10 years ago.....



Well you cant go wrong with them, hope they dont cost you in the end.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

70


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> 70



Very probable if Labor get in, but having said that, I will be voting for them.
Time for a change IMO.
No down side for me, we need a think big , think $÷×@ plan, which Labor are great at coming up with, but useless at implementing.
So it really is a win win for shareholders.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well your analysis is expected.lol
> Absolutely, cant wait to see your input, when you move out of the purple patch.lol
> When you are too old for the shutdowns, too old for the recruitment companies and too young for the pension. Lol
> So you think the police just go around looking for people to lock up and do all the paperwork associated with it?
> You really are out of touch, but at least it gives the Libs a chance, if you are representitive of the average Labor voter.



Do you think ill be as bitter and twisted like you by then or should I try harder


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Do you think ill be as bitter and twisted like you by then or should I try harder



Im not bitter and twisted, just a retired worker, watching all you workers screw each other over.
Like I said, Im voting Labor, a shot of reality is well overdue.


----------



## moXJO (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Im not bitter and twisted, just a retired worker, watching all you workers screw each other over.
> Like I said, Im voting Labor, a shot of reality is well overdue.



Vote anyone but Labor. Until they actually come up with something, they are still the same useless turds they always were. 

The one eyed die-hards on here would vote Labor no matter what.


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

moXJO said:


> Vote anyone but Labor. Until they actually come up with something, they are still the same useless turds they always were.
> 
> The one eyed die-hards on here would vote Labor no matter what.



Exactly, and the very reason they need a reminder IMO, in a lot of ways there has been a role reversal.
The media hammering the Libs, has bashed them into submission and they are pizzing on themselves, which is good because they have thrown $hit loads of money at the economy and caused a V shaped recovery,
But now IMO, we need a really big stupid amount of money thrown at renewables, because it is the only way Australia can stay relevant and in the International eye, if we don't we will just get swamped by ridiculous niche agenda's and minority groups that are in favour with the left leaning media and go nowhere but down the gurgler.
If Labor gets in, IMO they will go full on renewables and the media will back it in to the max, which will have a compounding effect on the budget deficit, but being Labor they will get away with probably some pretty outrageous things to reign in the deficit.
Time will tell.
At the moment nothing positive is getting airplay, so the election is due in the next 12 months, I doubt much will change Morrison could part the waters it wouldn't get a mention on the news.
So labor in all probability are going to get in, unless they stuff up like last time, but they are keeping their heads down, so they should get in.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2021)

Guys, guys you seem to be agreeing with each other despite the bickering.   

Let's all vote Labor and see if they can come up with something better than SloMo, who is just a failed advertising guru past his use by date.

Labor have got to provide a good alternative though, otherwise their inner city trendies will vote Green and the struggling workers will vote one Nation.

What a mess that will be !


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Guys, guys you seem to be agreeing with each other despite the bickering.
> 
> Let's all vote Labor and see if they can come up with something better than SloMo, who is just a failed advertising guru past his use by date.
> 
> ...



I wouldn't say Morrison has failed, I think they have done a great job with the virus, jobseeker, jobkeeper, borders etc, but I do think unless something enlightening comes out soon, they are past their use by date. 
It is just the way it is in Australia, we are a small population on a big island, we have to punch above our weight to remain relevant.
If we don't IMO, we will end up just becoming another Bali.


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I wouldn't say Morrison has failed, I think they have done a great job with the virus, jobseeker, jobkeeper, borders etc, but I do think unless something enlightening comes out soon, they are past their use by date.
> It is just the way it is in Australia, we are a small population on a big island, we have to punch above our weight to remain relevant.
> If we don't IMO, we will end up just becoming another Bali.



Dont forget the vaccine


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

And 1.2 billion robodebt


----------



## Humid (18 April 2021)

Jobkeeper good job you say?









						The Big Grift: How the Top End of Town rorted Jobkeeper - Michael West
					

The most rampant era of welfare rorting in Australia's history draws to a close at the end of the month when the JobKeeper scheme ends.




					www.michaelwest.com.au
				




sickening


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Jobkeeper good job you say?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Lets not forget jobseeker as well. 😂
Plenty of rorts at both ends of the ladder.




__





						No Cookies | The Courier Mail
					

No Cookies




					www.couriermail.com.au


----------



## sptrawler (18 April 2021)

Humid said:


> Dont forget the vaccine











						PM 'in no hurry' to open borders as he pleads with eligible Australians to get vaccinated
					

Prime Minister Scott Morrison says Australia is in no rush to open its borders to international travel as he calls on people to get vaccinated against COVID-19.




					www.abc.net.au
				



From the article:
_Doctors are now reporting patients are missing their appointments over vaccine safety concerns, saying thousands of doses of the AstraZeneca shot are sitting idle in fridges across the country.

On Sunday, Mr Morrison said it was essential eligible Australians received the vaccine.

"Please, make that booking, go and see your GP or a GP that's administering the vaccine in your area. Your local MP can help you with that if you need that help_."










						Hotel security guards, cleaners still refusing to get jab as WA explores mandatory vaccinations
					

New figures released by WA Health show of the 1752 hotel quarantine workers, just one in every four was fully immunised.




					www.watoday.com.au
				








__





						No Cookies | Daily Telegraph
					

No Cookies




					www.dailytelegraph.com.au
				












						Support grows in Morrison government for next-gen vaccines being made locally
					

Cutting edge vaccines to fight COVID-19 could be made in Australia, with support growing in the Morrison government for onshore manufacturing.




					www.smh.com.au


----------



## PZ99 (19 April 2021)

Crikeys guys... Let's vote Labor or anyone but Labor... ?

Here's an alternative opinion.... wait for the election and the policies, choose the gist from the jest, THEN declare your vote  🏁


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2021)

PZ99 said:


> Crikeys guys... Let's vote Labor or anyone but Labor... ?
> 
> Here's an alternative opinion.... wait for the election and the policies, choose the gist from the jest, THEN declare your vote  🏁




Yes, but we can also vote partly on past performance . 

9 years is a long time, has the country moved forward ?


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Also there is never a mention, as to how high the crime rate is represented by such a small percentage of the population, there would be much less deaths in custody if they werent in custody.
> Rather than saying why are indigenous dying in custody, why arent they asking, why are so many young indeginous kids commiting crimes?
> Its a bit like trying to treat the symptom, rather than the desease, but I guess you arent allowed to say that these days.
> Appo logies for spelling issues, on a phone.lol



Much has to do with the continuing level of disadvantage of ATSIs.
It's an area which Morrison cares little about - no votes - and seldom is reported on by the ABC.  Morrison has continued the ineptitude of the government by neglecting the symptoms, so we *all* suffer the consequences of the disease.


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

PZ99 said:


> Crikeys guys... Let's vote Labor or anyone but Labor... ?
> 
> Here's an alternative opinion.... wait for the election and the policies, choose the gist from the jest, THEN declare your vote  🏁



Labor supports funding the ABC.
Libs want to privatise the ABC, and only Turnbull's sensibilities prevailed in 2018 to quash the move (but not the momentum).


----------



## PZ99 (19 April 2021)

rederob said:


> Labor supports funding the ABC.
> Libs want to privatise the ABC, and only Turnbull's sensibilities prevailed in 2018 to quash the move (but not the momentum).



I would continue to support funding the ABC but I think it should be more efficient than it is.
My view expressed early in this thread is there's too much waste - especially in their radio sector.




SirRumpole said:


> Yes, but we can also vote partly on past performance .
> 
> 9 years is a long time, has the country moved forward ?



No it hasn't but it has moved in three different directions (conservative, progressive, populism) with three different leaders in conjunction with similar shifts on display by the opposition.

For that reason alone past performance is not a true indicator of future results


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2021)

rederob said:


> Much has to do with the continuing level of disadvantage of ATSIs.
> It's an area which Morrison cares little about - no votes - and seldom is reported on by the ABC.  Morrison has continued the ineptitude of the government by neglecting the symptoms, so we *all* suffer the consequences of the disease.



If it was only so simple Rob, it would have been fixed when you were writing policy. 
It has been going on for the last 40 years and many parties in office.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 April 2021)

PZ99 said:


> I would continue to support funding the ABC but I think it should be more efficient than it is.
> My view expressed early in this thread is there's too much waste - especially in their radio sector.




They also spend a lot on big budget drama that few people watch.



PZ99 said:


> For that reason alone past performance is not a true indicator of future results




I think past performance is pretty indicative of future performance as far as conservative governments go. If they keep getting voted in they see no need for change.

What was Morrison's agenda before covid ?


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

PZ99 said:


> I would continue to support funding the ABC but I think it should be more efficient than it is.
> My view expressed early in this thread is there's too much waste - especially in their radio sector.



Personal opinion versus data:






Fewer people doing a whole lot more:





Charter of the Corporation

             (1)  The functions of the Corporation are:

                     (a)  to provide within Australia innovative and comprehensive broadcasting services of a high standard as part of the Australian broadcasting system consisting of national, commercial and community sectors and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, to provide:

                              (i)  broadcasting programs that contribute to a sense of national identity and inform and entertain, and reflect the cultural diversity of, the Australian community; and

                             (ii)  broadcasting programs of an educational nature;

                     (b)  to transmit to countries outside Australia broadcasting programs of news, current affairs, entertainment and cultural enrichment that will:

                              (i)  encourage awareness of Australia and an international understanding of Australian attitudes on world affairs; and

                             (ii)  enable Australian citizens living or travelling outside Australia to obtain information about Australian affairs and Australian attitudes on world affairs; and

                   (ba)  to provide digital media services; and

                     (c)  to encourage and promote the musical, dramatic and other performing arts in Australia.


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> If it was only so simple Rob, it would have been fixed when you were writing policy.
> It has been going on for the last 40 years and many parties in office.



Make that over 200 years.  
But you missed the point in that Morrison's mob has failed to deliver on what were considered achievable targets, and his government continues it's ineptitude.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2021)

rederob said:


> Make that over 200 years.
> But you missed the point in that Morrison's mob has failed to deliver on what were considered achievable targets, and his government continues it's ineptitude.



Well then no doubt it will be fixed next term, when Labor get in, which will be terrific after 200 years.


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Well then no doubt it will be fixed next term, when Labor get in, which will be terrific after 200 years.



You should audition for dancing with the stars.
Your footwork on the "sidestep" is amazing.
Oh, sorry, it's not on the ABC.
Another misstep.


----------



## sptrawler (19 April 2021)

rederob said:


> You should audition for dancing with the stars.
> Your footwork on the "sidestep" is amazing.
> Oh, sorry, it's not on the ABC.
> Another misstep.



It's always easy, when with such a gifted partner, as yourself. 😂


----------



## rederob (19 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> It's always easy, when you such a gifted partner, as yourself. 😂



That's what my wife says!






(I wish.)


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2021)

ABC in strife, yet again. 
Over zealousness is always a problem, when you are on a mission. 😂 









						ABC forced to admit to unfairness in finance reports
					

The ABC has expressed regret over serious errors in its coverage of some of the biggest financial decisions made by the federal government during the COVID-19 pandemic.




					amp.theaustralian.com.au


----------



## PZ99 (26 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> ABC in strife, yet again.
> Over zealousness is always a problem, when you are on a mission. 😂
> 
> 
> ...



Do you have access to the full article ? I can't see it without a consubscription


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2021)

PZ99 said:


> Do you have access to the full article ? I can't see it without a consubscription



No I don't have access, no doubt it will come out on the other outlets, or on ABC media watch.


----------



## rederob (26 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> No I don't have access, no doubt it will come out on the other outlets, or on ABC media watch.



Why do we have to wait?
The ABC is as incompetent as the government which stripped them of their ability to do decent journalism.
Two wrongs, right.


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2021)

rederob said:


> Why do we have to wait?
> The ABC is as incompetent as the government which stripped them of their ability to do decent journalism.
> Two wrongs, right.



We shouldn't have to wait, the ABC should have the story on their website.


----------



## rederob (26 April 2021)

sptrawler said:


> We shouldn't have to wait, the ABC should have the story on their website.



Maybe, although I doubt the ABC will give it much attention.
It's called a beat up.
Senator Bragg had been after the ABC since they called him out on his ill founded statements on the banking royal commission and on Gillard's Future of Financial Advice Laws - even Bragg in retrospect admitted he got it wrong.
Bragg was formerly employed by the Financial Services Council - the peak lobbyists for banking and finance interests!
Cutting a long story short, Bragg was proposing changes to superannuation laws, by adding just one powerful word to the role of trustees, viz., that they act "in the best *financial *interest" of members.
Bragg's proposal was aimed squarely at the *New Daily*, which was being used by the ABC as a major information source.
The ABC has now agreed that it's arrangement for information from the *New Daily* was not in keeping with its remit.

I could not find anything the ABC got wrong in terms of actual content as that usually goes through ACMA.
The massive problem with Bragg's proposal is that industry super funds for example would be prohibited from lobbying on issues that protected or enhanced the employment of their members, without necessarily benefitting the fund.  Alternatively, funds could be prosecuted for investing in green initiatives which were not yet financially beneficial.


----------



## bellenuit (21 June 2021)

From The Australian


----------



## Humid (21 June 2021)

bellenuit said:


> From The Australian
> 
> View attachment 126408



But doesn't dispute the messages to Morrisons mate


----------



## sptrawler (9 August 2021)

ABC staff told to reign in their social media posts.








						ABC boss warns staff over social media posts
					

The ABC has updated its social media policies for the second time this year following a string of incidents involving high-profile reporters.




					www.theage.com.au
				



From the article:
In an email to staff on Monday, Mr Anderson, the managing director, said staff were legally accountable for their personal social media accounts, but could still face disciplinary conduct under the ABC Code of Conduct for their posts.
“The primary concern is when personal social media activity reflects badly on the ABC’s independence and integrity, or when a poorly judged post or series of posts or ‘likes’ compromises perceptions of the impartiality of someone in an ABC role where maintaining impartiality in the public eye is crucial,” Mr Anderson said in the email.

“So, to protect yourself and the ABC, I offer this simple piece of advice: If you are posting, liking, or sharing something on personal social media that is work-related or about a matter of public controversy – ask yourself if it’s something you would also say, write or share on an ABC platform.”
Milligan, the ABC’s star investigative reporter at _Four Corners, _is being sued by Queensland federal Liberal MP Andrew Laming over a tweet alleging he had taken an “upskirting” photo of a woman bending over. Queensland police in April cleared him of any criminal offence in connection with the photo.

The ABC is covering Milligan’s legal costs. But Mr Anderson, in his email, indicated staff would be personally liable for their social media content, saying if they followed his advice “you are far less likely to find yourself in breach of the ABC Code of Conduct or defending a legal claim from a third party at your own personal cost”.


----------



## bellenuit (9 August 2021)

sptrawler said:


> “So, to protect yourself and the ABC, I offer this simple piece of advice: If you are posting, liking, or sharing something on personal social media that is work-related or about a matter of public controversy – ask yourself if it’s something you would also say, write or share on an ABC platform.”




This doesn't seem to me like a unbiased MO to work under.

I think many of those who express disdain (say) for politicians of a particular party would also express the same feelings on an ABC platform if they could get away with it. I think it would be more appropriate to say that they shouldn't express any opinion on social media under their personal accounts that violate the ABC rule of ethics (not that they are that stringent) regarding what can be said on official ABC platforms. ABC staff should have to comply with more stringent standards regarding expressing personal opinions than commercial media staff.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 August 2021)

Andrew Lamming wins defamation case against ABC reporter.









						ABC journalist agrees to pay MP $79,000 in defamation settlement over tweets
					

ABC journalist Louise Milligan agrees to pay Federal Liberal MP Andrew Laming $79,000 in a defamation case over a series of tweets she sent earlier this year.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## sptrawler (11 August 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Andrew Lamming wins defamation case against ABC reporter.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It sounds as though the media can't even agree on a court outcome. 🤣





						No Cookies | The Courier Mail
					

No Cookies




					www.couriermail.com.au
				




Taxpayer pays $120k bill for ABC journo’s tweets​ABC journalist Louise Milligan will pay Liberal MP Andrew Laming over tweets suggesting he “upskirted” a woman – and the public will foot the massive bill.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 August 2021)

sptrawler said:


> It sounds as though the media can't even agree on a court outcome. 🤣
> 
> 
> 
> ...




To me, it's just another step in the sad decline of the ABC, from unbiased reporters who analyse evidence to social crusaders who shoot from the hip and let the taxpayers pay for their mistakes.

If their reporters are suscessfully sued, then they should be sacked, it might teach them a few lessons.


----------



## sptrawler (12 August 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> To me, it's just another step in the sad decline of the ABC, from unbiased reporters who analyse evidence to social crusaders who shoot from the hip and let the taxpayers pay for their mistakes.
> 
> If their reporters are suscessfully sued, then they should be sacked, it might teach them a few lessons.



At the minimum they should have to pay their own fines, if the ABC chooses to pay the fine, IMO they are accepting responsibility for the posts.
Punishment is served to chastise bad behaviour, someone else paying the punishment, encourages a continuation of that bad behaviour IMO.
It is like if I bashed someone unconscious and was given 6 months jail, but my wife who likes her own company says, don't worry I'll do it for you. Would that be allowed?
In the ABC's case, it is the taxpayer, who is taking the punishment. For a reporter, who is paid by the taxpayer, doing something wrong.
Just my opinion.


----------



## mullokintyre (10 September 2021)

It looks like the ABC is in deep dodo this time.
Whatever your thoughts on Cory Bernardi being among other things, a right wind rgotitical ar$ehole, he has been well and truly done over by the ABC. From Todays OZ


> Former Senator and Sky News host Cory Bernardi has launched legal action against the ABC after they aired allegations by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young – which he vehemently denied – on their popular TV series Ms Represented.
> It comes just several days after the ABC issued an apology to Mr Bernardi for failing to give him a “fair opportunity” to respond to the claims made during the program and they conceded they had breached their own editorial standards.
> 
> The ABC has been issued with legal documents by Mr Bernardi – a senator from 2006 to 2020 – and he is suing the public broadcaster for $400,000 in damages and ordered they remove the episode from its streaming platform iview as well as all promotional material and pay Mr Bernardi’s legal costs.
> ...



The critical part here is that a specific date is mentioned in the article. 
I did not see the show in question, I was washing my hair at the time.
However, if indeed that sitting date was stated as the date these harassment  events were said to have  occurred, then both the ABC and SHY are dead in the water.
Somebody called "theseekeroftruth" has trawled through the parliamentary footage for that sitting day, and the evidence contradicts a large chunk of what  SHY said. 
At the time Bernardi was still a member of the Liberal party, and thus went and sat with the other liberals, nowhere near the cross benches where SHY sat. 
From what I have heard, this seekeroftruth person contacted Bernardi with their findings, which may or may not have prompted the court case.
The ABC have already issued an apology  to Berrnardi for not giving him the right of reply, and for not following their own procedural guidelines. 
Given the massive resources that the ABC have, including resources, producers, editors, legal people, it is stunning that none of them thought to  have a look at the freely available footage is stunning.
The fact that Crabb's husband, Jeremy Storer , is the ABC in house boss lawyer is in more stunning.
Should be a fascinating little event to just grab some popcorn and sit back and let it all unfold.
Mick


----------



## SirRumpole (10 September 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> It looks like the ABC is in deep dodo this time.
> Whatever your thoughts on Cory Bernardi being among other things, a right wind rgotitical ar$ehole, he has been well and truly done over by the ABC. From Todays OZ
> 
> The critical part here is that a specific date is mentioned in the article.
> ...




Very disappointed with the ABC  these days.

They seem to have been taken over by the far Left. Everyone with some sort of social axe to grind in the area of racism, sexism, discrimination etc gets a voice , but the ABC appears to do little to verify their stories or determine whether there is evidence to support them. That's why the ABC ends up in the defamation trials a lot more often.

People like Chris Masters did too, but he could back up what he said. The cub reporters the ABC have these days are too lazy to do any real work.


----------



## IFocus (11 September 2021)

"Whatever your thoughts on Cory Bernardi being among other things, a right wind rgotitical ar$ehole, he has been well and truly done over by the ABC. From Todays OZ"

Good...


----------



## mullokintyre (11 September 2021)

So you think its ok for theA BC in concert with SHY to peddle lies about someone, as long as that someone is a person you disagree with?
I wonder what your reaction would be if  Rupert Murdoch did the same thing  to someone from the left?

Mick


----------



## moXJO (12 September 2021)

ABC couldn't even do the basics. 

Shout out to 'Seekers of truth' for putting the evidence together:





__





						Senate [Part 3] - 04/12/2014 19:00:00 - Parliament of Australia
					

Home




					parlview.aph.gov.au


----------



## IFocus (12 September 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> So you think its ok for theA BC in concert with SHY to peddle lies about someone, as long as that someone is a person you disagree with?
> I wonder what your reaction would be if  Rupert Murdoch did the same thing  to someone from the left?
> 
> Mick





Mick, Murdoch does that every day its expected and no one expects anything else, as for Bernardi  he was just a shocking politician.

The ABC makes mistakes same as any media but they are still far and away the most trusted news source in Australia.


----------



## mullokintyre (12 September 2021)

IFocus said:


> Mick, Murdoch does that every day its expected and no one expects anything else, as for Bernardi  he was just a shocking politician.
> 
> The ABC makes mistakes same as any media but they are still far and away the most trusted news source in Australia.



When you say Murdoch, I presume you are referring to Rupert Murdoch.
I  am always surprised that so many people think that Murdoch has any great interest in what transpires in the pettiness of politics and its place in the media. Australian media, much less have any interest in personally directing what gets reported in any of the Newsgroup outlets.
As for Bernardi being a shocking politician, that is always a subjective analysis, but equally it should have no bearing on whether he should be libelled by the ABC and SHY.  Bernardi should be punished at the ballot box  if he has transgressed, as should all politicians. The court of public opinion will eventually be worked out in the ballot box.

If as you suggest this was a mistake, rather than a deliberate setup, it makes a mockery of the "Most trusted news source in Australia".
The ABC web site has those very words on its web site.
Its a moniker they have assumed themselves rather than been given.
Just look at the reporting on the dork who put up cheesy chalkboards signs in Tasmania. The ABC reported it as a Hotel where Scott Morrison had had a few beers.
 I am sure there are lots of people who have had a lot more beers than the PM, but they don't rate a mention.
Why was this piece of information added to the story other than to  try to taint the PM with the news.  It added no context to the story anbd was just so blatantly transparent. 
Look at the reporting of the rape allegations by Brittany Higgins against a male Liberal Staffer. The ABC morphed it into a case of her not being supported enough by the liberals, with absolutely no mention of the bastrd who is supposed to have commited the rape.
It was blatantly obvious that the rape allegations against Christian Porter would never standup during any scrutiny, but the ABC and others piled into him. And yet, not one of them have ever bought up the fact that Bill Shorten was accused of rape by a young woman, and has made complaints that the police decided could not produce a conviction.  She is happy to be interviewed by any of the ABC fems who supported the  idea that  victims of sexual violence should be heard and believed. Well , when it suits their political leanings that is.  None of them seem interested in her story as it does not suit "the narrative".
Mick


----------



## bellenuit (14 September 2021)

I don't want to create a separate thread on SBS as in many ways it shows the same bias as the ABC.

This is just a tiny example taken from an e-mail I received from them yesterday.

Cast you mind back to when Tony Abbott joined a group of protesters outside parliament house that were demonstrating over something or other (can't recall at this stage). Someone in the crowd behind Abbott had a sign that said "Ditch The Witch". Abbott denied he had anything to do with it and arguments went back and forth as to whether he was even aware that the sign was there. Your view on it was largely determined by your politics.

I haven't seen the show yet, but in an email advertising the forthcoming show on Julia Gillard, they had the drawing below. No buts and doubts for the SBS. Not only was Abbott aware of the sign, but he was actually holding it.

I always recall there seemed no such outrage from either the ABC or SBS when crowds of left wing demonstrators had signs saying "Ho Ho The Witch is Dead" on the news of Margaret Thatchers death.


----------



## IFocus (14 September 2021)

ABC bias apparently the rabid left thinks so

Bullying on Twitter has become unhinged. It's time to call out the personal, sexist attacks​
Even the respected Fran Kelly, host of Radio National Breakfast, is attacked as a mouthpiece for the Liberal Party,

Let's not duck the common thread here — it is overwhelmingly left-leaning Twitter users who are targeting ABC journalists for abuse. Of course, there are right-wing attacks too but the most ferocious campaigns are reserved for any journalist who questions, in even the most anodyne manner, the policies or public statements of Labor politicians, particularly the Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese, the Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, the Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and the West Australian Premier Mark McGowan.









						I'm used to angry calls and political bullies, but what's happening on Twitter is far more insidious
					

Putting up with bullying has always been a feature of political journalism, but something has changed recently which is making political bullying far more insidious and increasingly challenging to bear, writes Leigh Sales.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## bellenuit (14 September 2021)

The Left is known for eating their own.


----------



## moXJO (14 September 2021)

The left know that the left centre will shut up and fall in line. 

Unlike us right leaners who would die of oxygen deprivation if lefties tried to legislate and enforce "mandatory breathing".


----------



## bellenuit (14 September 2021)

bellenuit said:


> I don't want to create a separate thread on SBS as in many ways it shows the same bias as the ABC.




Perhaps complaining does work. I replied to the email (see a few posts up) I received from SBS promoting the Gillard documentary, mentioning that the drawing of Abbott holding the sign "Ditch The Witch" was an absolute disgrace and distortion of the facts, for which SBS should be ashamed. I have just received this reply:


----------



## basilio (15 September 2021)

IFocus said:


> ABC bias apparently the rabid left thinks so
> 
> Bullying on Twitter has become unhinged. It's time to call out the personal, sexist attacks​
> Even the respected Fran Kelly, host of Radio National Breakfast, is attacked as a mouthpiece for the Liberal Party,
> ...



That was an outstanding personal story from Leigh Sales on the poison that on line media and Twitter unleashes on journalists doing their job.

Their job is to question without fear or favour people in power about what they are doing when running the country. So clearly they have to take a rigorous  questioning approach to all politicians - otherwise they are not doing their job.

I read that story carefully.  It was interesting that  for much of the story it focused on the hate campaign waged against the ABC in general and then individual presenters including the vile rubbish she was continually served up. She noted the use by political parties of proxies to attack her and others.

The comments towards the end that IFocus quoted were a reminder that haters and trollers are not just from one side of the political spectrum. Well worth putting in. IF the rest of the article is also acknowledged as very troubling.


----------



## mullokintyre (15 September 2021)

Social media is very anti-social.
Mick


----------



## SirRumpole (15 September 2021)

basilio said:


> That was an outstanding personal story from Leigh Sales on the poison that on line media and Twitter unleashes on journalists doing their job.
> 
> Their job is to question without fear or favour people in power about what they are doing when running the country. So clearly they have to take a rigorous  questioning approach to all politicians - otherwise they are not doing their job.
> 
> ...




I was pretty disgusted by the antics exposed in Leigh's story.

On the other hand I find myself banned from posting on most but the most trivial ABC stories on a couple of their Facebook sites. This is pretty unacceptable to me as I have never disparaged any ABC journalist and have actually complimented some. It amounts to censorship of reasonable content.

I've said for some time that the ABC using commercial social media sites was a mistake. If the ABC allows social commentary then it should employ their own moderators and be responsible for their own content instead of passing the buck to commercial operators.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2021)

Not much on the ABC website about this one.








						ABC discloses more staff underpayments
					

The broadcaster repaid staff about $12 million last year after casuals complained they were not getting the right pay.




					www.smh.com.au
				




Wonder if it will make the 7.30 report, Q and A , or fact check?


----------



## sptrawler (14 October 2021)

The ABC and other media, could do worse than read some of that which they print and take notice.
Sometimes some people just get it. 









						Billy Connolly says life with Parkinson's disease 'has its moments'
					

Comedian Billy Connolly was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease in 2013. While he tries not to dwell on his diagnosis, he admits it has been challenging.




					www.abc.net.au
				



From the article:

The 78-year-old now resides in Florida with his wife Pamela, but says if he was a younger man he would happily live in Australia.

"I love Australia," he tells 7.30.

"It's a beautiful country and ... the treasure it has is its optimism.



> "It has optimism, and not many people have [that]. Most people are living in misery."



Connolly says in his early days working at a Glasgow shipyard, he never understood why the workers were so negative.

"They didn't like being welders, and they didn't like where they lived, and they didn't like their wives," he says. 

"I never understood it. There was a lack of optimism, the [lack of] caring about the future."


----------



## basilio (16 November 2021)

Late breaking news.

*Peter Dutton named new ABC news anchor                *






Defence Minister Peter Dutton’s portfolio has been extended to including hosting ABC’s seven o’clock bulletin, in a move designed to ensure Australians hear the right news.

Mr Dutton – who will take on the role in addition to his existing responsibilities – has extensive media experience and is seen as having a better grasp than his predecessors of the types of stories Australians should hear.                                                                                

“Peter will decide what news comes in, and the circumstances in which it comes,” a colleague explained, saying it was a coup for the ABC. “The ABC will really set the agenda with Dutton behind the desk,” he said.

A senior ABC executive said it was a positive step for the national broadcaster, and part of the ABC’s vision to appeal to a broader range of Australian MPs. “I think it’s true that we have become a bit niche, that we’ve been slow to modernise. And I think it’s fair to say we’ve lost sight of what Australian Governments in the 21st Century want from their news”.









						Peter Dutton named new ABC news anchor
					

"It's important that Australians hear the right news"




					www.theshovel.com.au


----------



## mullokintyre (17 November 2021)

Great idea.
At least with Dutton, if we don't like the way he is doing his job, and letting the wrong sort of news through, we can vote him out at the next election.
Which of course is exactly the opposite of the current set of unelected self serving egos. who run the ABC.
Mick


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2021)

basilio said:


> Late breaking news.
> 
> *Peter Dutton named new ABC news anchor                *
> 
> ...




He's obviously the new anker, as opposed to the old one.


----------



## mullokintyre (17 November 2021)

Very Subtle Sir Rumpole, very Subtle!
Mick


----------



## Investoradam (19 November 2021)

basilio said:


> Late breaking news.
> 
> *Peter Dutton named new ABC news anchor                *
> 
> ...



it would be hilarious if Mr photo head was an ABC news anchor!
what id give to be a fly on the wall just to see the looks on the faces of those useless marxist ABC employees


----------



## mullokintyre (23 November 2021)

The ABC is not having a good time of late.
They have had a few problems with some shoddy reporting, but now a slightly bigger problem has  been uncovered.
From  Veteran Support Forum



> Over a year ago, on 20 October 2020, the ABC published an article based on the account of a US Marine who alleged that November Platoon of the 2nd Commando Regiment had executed a “prisoner” in Afghanistan in “mid-2012”.
> 
> In this story, the ABC stated that, “A United States Marine Corps (USMC) helicopter crew chief says Australian special forces shot and killed a bound Afghan prisoner after being told he would not fit on the US aircraft coming to pick them up.”
> 
> ...



By far the biggest problem for the ABC comes from one of the November platoon members who appears in a You tube video
November platoon did not arrive in Afghanistan until mid July, and did not even commence operations until mid August of 2012.
Records show that November Platoon did not commence operations  in the province where the murder was supposed to have taken place until November 2012, some two months later.
The really galling part about al of this is that neither the ABC or its reporters contacted any of the November platoon  members.
And in what is even more galling, is that the defence department nor veterans affairs had contacted any of the platoons  members up to the time the video was made.
I marched against the Vietnam war when at Uni, much to my parents horror.
I was eligible for the Vietnam era conscription, but did not get called up.
Some of my friends did.
The way they were treated when they returned mad me feel ashamed, not for marching against the war, but for the way they were discarded and abandoned and were made scapegoats for a disastrous war   when they had little or no choice in the matter.
At least in the next fruitless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan there were no conscripts.
It seems that times have not changed much.
Mick


----------



## SirRumpole (23 November 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> The ABC is not having a good time of late.
> They have had a few problems with some shoddy reporting, but now a slightly bigger problem has  been uncovered.
> From  Veteran Support Forum
> 
> ...




+1 from me.


----------



## wayneL (23 November 2021)

I suspect our resident leftists might want to push back on this, but the IPA has an ongoing series about problems with the ABC.

It's actually pretty interesting and obviously I'm listening from a centre right point of view, and I think a lot of the points, especially in regards to metropolitan vs regional stations is really spot on.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 November 2021)

wayneL said:


> I suspect our resident leftists might want to push back on this, but the IPA has an ongoing series about problems with the ABC.
> 
> It's actually pretty interesting and obviously I'm listening from a centre right point of view, and I think a lot of the points, especially in regards to metropolitan vs regional stations is really spot on.




You wouldn't expect the IPA to be pro ABC since the IPA's policy is to privatise it, but in my opinion the ABC is becoming too woke, too PC , and not concentrating enough on the common needs of all the population.

Have a look at the ABC's home page and it looks more like a women's magazine than a news site. The ABC appears to think that it should be a spokesperson for minorities when in reality we all share the same needs regardless of what our ethnicities or religions are and that should be reflected by the ABC.

The ABC was totally biased in the gay marriage issue, giving overwhelming coverage to the yes side while almost completely ignoring the alternative view. It concentrated on picking winners rather than giving both sides a fair go.

If you try and put a comment on some of the ABC's Facebook page and say something "unwoke", you get banned, I know it happened to me.

Some of the stories say the ABC have 'restricted who can post on this topic' ! That's unacceptable in a democracy.

I usually support the ABC, but their bias is becoming obvious and irritating,  even to me as a  "hard core Lefty" (eh wayne   ).


----------



## wayneL (24 November 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> ,  even to me as a  "hard core Lefty" (eh wayne   ).
> 
> View attachment 133296




I've said it before mate, that I think over a couple of beers at the pub, we would probably find a lot in common... Even if the conversation may be a bit "lively" over some issues


----------



## wayneL (24 November 2021)

And I've said it before. I'd share a beer with anyone on here.... Face to face, it's easier to see each other's point of view.

So that's genuine, even with bas, red, humid, whomever.


----------



## mullokintyre (24 November 2021)

wayneL said:


> And I've said it before. I'd share a beer with anyone on here.... Face to face, it's easier to see each other's point of view.
> 
> So that's genuine, even with bas, red, humid, whomever.



You obviously never met my mother in law.
Mick


----------



## moXJO (24 November 2021)

wayneL said:


> And I've said it before. I'd share a beer with anyone on here.... Face to face, it's easier to see each other's point of view.
> 
> So that's genuine, even with bas, red, humid, whomever.



They are actually some of my favourite posters. But God I love giving them stick.


----------



## sptrawler (26 November 2021)

wayneL said:


> And I've said it before. I'd share a beer with anyone on here.... Face to face, it's easier to see each other's point of view.
> 
> So that's genuine, even with bas, red, humid, whomever.



moXJO said:
They are actually some of my favourite posters. But God I love giving them stick.




If we didn't have posters with differing views, the forum wouldn't survive, it would be as boring as duck $hit.

As long as we can have robust debate, that doesn't degenerate into name calling, it helps broaden our perspective on subjects.

That is the really endearing quality of ASF, it very seldom falls into infantile mud slinging, which is the reason we have so many long term quality contributors IMO.


----------



## mullokintyre (26 November 2021)

For all those ASF members who care to add to the debate, the ABC has announced that it will allow the general public to make submissions to the independent enquiry into the complaints processes of the ABC.
Andrew Bragg , who had announce a senate enquiry into the complaints process before getting shutdown by his own party is taking the credit  for forcing the ABC into allowing the general public to make submissions.
It may or may not be true, but is also irrelevant.
When the ABC announced the inquiry, the terms of reference made no mention of the allowance for public input.
The change in the terms may have been prompted by outside influences, but what most important is that us long suffering owners of the ABC will get to have our twenty cents worth.
The announcement of the change in terms came via The Oz which is not surprising as they are the dreaded Murdoch Press .
However, I failed to find a similar announcement on the ABC website.
Mick


----------



## Logique2 (28 November 2021)

The ABC Chair was appointed by a Coalition government. She must have been a good girl in a past life.
Nice bit of retirement superannuation. Easy money, as everyone knows the staff collectorate runs the place.

She came out of private enterprise.  From which she'd long have been sacked by now -on performance basis to the ABC Charter. 

*$1.1Billion p.a* -paid by taxpayers to the ABC, just fyi Ita.  _By taxpayers Ita_.

*Ita Idle*.
_"quango
a semi-public administrative body outside the civil service but receiving financial support from the government, which makes senior appointments to it.
Definitions from Oxford Languages"_


----------



## Logique2 (28 November 2021)

basilio said:


> Late breaking news.
> 
> *Peter Dutton named new ABC news anchor                *
> 
> ...



Good post Bas. Although I actually like and support Dutton, we all need to lighten up sometimes!


----------



## Investoradam (28 November 2021)

Logique2 said:


> The ABC Chair was appointed by a Coalition government. She must have been a good girl in a past life.
> Nice bit of retirement superannuation. Easy money, as everyone knows the staff collectorate runs the place.
> 
> She came out of private enterprise.  From which she'd long have been sacked by now -on performance basis to the ABC Charter.
> ...



And one government organisation that refuses to open there books to any one


----------



## mullokintyre (17 December 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> The ABC is not having a good time of late.
> They have had a few problems with some shoddy reporting, but now a slightly bigger problem has  been uncovered.
> From  Veteran Support Forum
> 
> ...



The ABC has had it in for the ADF for sometime.
Another  piece having a crack at them has caused so much fury that thee hierarchy have been forced to make an apology.
In an article about two former ADF soldiers getting awarded the USm edal the Silver Start for their heroics in Vietnam, it finished with the words 


> _that there had finally been ‘*recognition of brave deeds performed by two Aussies for their American masters’. *_



This peice of "analysis" adds nothingto the story of the mens bravery, and merely highlights the idealogical bastardry that drives the ABC.
Not surprisingly, there was sufficient backlash to force them to remove the offending words from the original article and to issue the apology.

From  ABC Correctionsthe 


> News: On 14 December, ABC News presented a story about two Australian soldiers who had been awarded military honours by the United States for exceptional valour in combat.  The story closed with an observation that there had finally been ‘recognition of brave deeds performed by two Aussies for their American masters’.  ABC News regrets this choice of words and acknowledges it has caused offence.  Australians fought alongside Americans as allies in the Vietnam War.



By the way, how many people knew there was an ABC corrections page ?
Makes interesting reading.
Mick


----------



## sptrawler (17 December 2021)

mullokintyre said:


> The ABC has had it in for the ADF for sometime.
> Another  piece having a crack at them has caused so much fury that thee hierarchy have been forced to make an apology.
> In an article about two former ADF soldiers getting awarded the USm edal the Silver Start for their heroics in Vietnam, it finished with the words
> 
> ...



IMO, these days the ABC may as well be funded by the South China Post, they certainly project a disparaging and derogatory opinion of Australia, while they rake in their excellent salaries off the back of Australia's taxpayers.
AS with most Australian media they always present Australia with a cup half empty outlook, it is only a matter of time before the Australian media goes the way of the dinosaur, most people I talk to avoid the media opinion pieces like the plague.
Anyone who actively followed Ross Gittins opinion pieces in the SMH, over the last 10 years, would be on suicide watch it is always doom and gloom. 🤣 I have always wondered if he actually invests at all.


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2022)

Interesting headline, it is the Australian so they do have an anti ABC bias, but it does bring up an interesting issue IMO. I've never watched Q&A so it would be interesting to hear what ASF members thought of the episode mentioned. Did Stan Grant do the right thing getting rid of an audience member, was the person in the audience being billigerent, or was Stan stifling debate?

Q+A records worst-ever ratings since it began in 2008​The ABC’s political chatfest program has tanked in the ratings and comes just one week after host Stan Grant booted a pro-Russian audience member while live on air.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 March 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting headline, it is the Australian so they do have an anti ABC bias, but it does bring up an interesting issue IMO. I've never watched Q&A so it would be interesting to hear what ASF members thought of the episode mentioned. Did Stan Grant do the right thing getting rid of an audience member, was the person in the audience being billigerent, or was Stan stifling debate?
> 
> Q+A records worst-ever ratings since it began in 2008​The ABC’s political chatfest program has tanked in the ratings and comes just one week after host Stan Grant booted a pro-Russian audience member while live on air.



They should axe it. The only people who would miss it would be the editors of The Australian who are also their most loyal viewers.


----------



## wayneL (11 March 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting headline, it is the Australian so they do have an anti ABC bias, but it does bring up an interesting issue IMO. I've never watched Q&A so it would be interesting to hear what ASF members thought of the episode mentioned. Did Stan Grant do the right thing getting rid of an audience member, was the person in the audience being billigerent, or was Stan stifling debate?
> 
> Q+A records worst-ever ratings since it began in 2008​The ABC’s political chatfest program has tanked in the ratings and comes just one week after host Stan Grant booted a pro-Russian audience member while live on air.



No he did the wrong thing, absolutely.

The program is q&A not Stan's (or the ABC) echo chamber. All views should be able to be debated in a liberal democracy, unless discussing something absolutely unlawful (say promoting pedophilia or something equally henious) or incitement to something unlawful.

Grant was being absolutely self-indulgent and I believe should actually be terminated from hosting the show (not that anyone would notice)


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2022)

Q&A used to be a good show. I still think they have got the time wrong. People are over politics by Thursday and are waiting for the weekend.

I keep forgetting that the show is on.

Sad to say but the topic of Ukraine is irrelevant to most Australians as there is nothing we can do about it.

Concentrating on mainstream issues like health, education etc might bring back the viewers.


----------



## wayneL (11 March 2022)

Anybody who his has participated in a school debate or any debating society know that you are often given a point of view which may be contrary to your own... Yet you are required to argue that point-of-view.

That level of maturity which we require from our schoolchildren, is now absolutely missing in the adult world. Adults are no longer willing to tolerate any of you contrary to their own... and that is absolutely puerile in my opinion.

That's how I see Stan in the example above, absolutely infantile in being unable to accept another point of view to his own.

That is a very bad omen for our society and in my opinion marks its end days.

To be replaced by watch, I do not know, but it cannot be good.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> Anybody who his has participated in a school debate or any debating society know that you are often given a point of view which may be contrary to your own... Yet you are required to argue that point-of-view.
> 
> That level of maturity which we require from our schoolchildren, is now absolutely missing in the adult world. Adults are no longer willing to tolerate any of you contrary to their own... and that is absolutely puerile in my opinion.
> 
> ...




Agreed to a point, but

Do we have to put up with  justification of unprovoked invasion of another country and shelling of civilians ?

Maybe some things are just unacceptable even in a 'free' society.


----------



## wayneL (11 March 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Agreed to a point, but
> 
> Do we have to put up with  justification of unprovoked invasion of another country and shelling of civilians ?
> 
> Maybe some things are just unacceptable even in a 'free' society.



What it gives us the opportunity to do, if they are truly wrong, is two debate strongly against them. Otherwise such views exist and fester underground never having been argued against.

The last we need is little echo chambers of extremists which may grow in strength under the cover of censorship.

Additionally who decides which views are unacceptable and on what basis?


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> What it gives us the opportunity to do, if they are truly wrong, is two debate strongly against them. Otherwise such views exist and fester underground never having been argued against.
> 
> The last we need is little echo chambers of extremists which may grow in strength under the cover of censorship.
> 
> Additionally who decides which views are unacceptable and on what basis?




OK, I'll take that.

I didn't see the show so I don't know if the person was being objectionable, eg shouting over people or being aggressive , but if they just asked a question and listened politely to the answer then that's fair enough.


----------



## wayneL (11 March 2022)

Here is the gentleman in question.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> Here is the gentleman in question.




Shouldn't have been thrown out. I think he's wrong but he seemed reasonably polite.


----------



## macca (11 March 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Shouldn't have been thrown out. I think he's wrong but he seemed reasonably polite.




Without commenting on this incident, I can certainly recall various QA left wing guests advocating violence and they most definitely, were not asked to leave.

In fact, they were allowed to speak at length while the audience applauded

Rather obvious bias by the ABC IMO


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Shouldn't have been thrown out. I think he's wrong but he seemed reasonably polite.



As you say, he really did ask a reasonable question, there should have been a short discussion on his claims, as to the veracity.
It is unfair to just say that he is advocating violence, it appeared he was asking a question Stan couldn't answer, so he was ejected.
As you say Rumpy you don't have to agree with his opinion, that was just straight censorship.


----------



## rederob (11 March 2022)

sptrawler said:


> As you say, he really did ask a reasonable question, there should have been a short discussion on his claims, as to the veracity.
> It is unfair to just say that he is advocating violence, it appeared he was asking a question Stan couldn't answer, so he was ejected.
> As you say Rumpy you don't have to agree with his opinion, that was just straight censorship.



Sacha condoned the *invasion* of a sovereign nation when he said "... there are a lot of Russians here and around the world that support what Putin is doing in the Ukraine, myself included".
In making that statement he condoned Putin's undeniable war in Ukraine that has exposed targeting of civilian infrastructure that has led to hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries amongst innocents.
His statement was not a necessary preamble to the question he eventually asked, and which was based on knowingly false numbers. 
Here's an example of what Sacha *supports*:


----------



## wayneL (11 March 2022)

rederob said:


> Sacha condoned the *invasion* of a sovereign nation when he said "... there are a lot of Russians here and around the world that support what Putin is doing in the Ukraine, myself included".
> In making that statement he condoned Putin's undeniable war in Ukraine that has exposed targeting of civilian infrastructure that has led to hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries amongst innocents.
> His statement was not a necessary preamble to the question he eventually asked, and which was based on knowingly false numbers.
> Here's an example of what Sacha *supports*:




Oh dear. And we've already covered this arguement above.

If we disagree with the gentleman's opinion then we can make a strong arguement against it, as you have indeed done.

That is still not a reason for actually silencing and ejecting the person from the audience.

Indeed, we in the West have our own history of invading sovereign countries, often for spurious reasons. I don't recall anyone being silenced, or ejected from audiences for having contrary opinions on that.


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2022)

rederob said:


> Sacha condoned the *invasion* of a sovereign nation when he said "... there are a lot of Russians here and around the world that support what Putin is doing in the Ukraine, myself included".
> In making that statement he condoned Putin's undeniable war in Ukraine that has exposed targeting of civilian infrastructure that has led to hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries amongst innocents.
> His statement was not a necessary preamble to the question he eventually asked, and which was based on knowingly false numbers.
> Here's an example of what Sacha *supports*:




No one is disputing the fact that Putin and Russia invading the Ukraine is wrong, but enlightening the audience as to some history behind it doesnt seem unreasonable, ejecting the person just seemed clumsy and non inclusive. Also as everyone knows, we are nothing if not inclusive.
It is becoming more and more obvious, we are inclusive as long as you agree with the narrative.


----------



## rederob (11 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> Oh dear. And we've already covered this arguement above.
> 
> If we disagree with the gentleman's opinion then we can make a strong arguement against it, as you have indeed done.
> 
> ...



In these debates there is a determination of equivalence that can be made.
That point was also made by panel members.
Sacha effectively said he *supports violence *and indiscriminate killing.
The equivalence is him equally supporting the invasion of Poland and killing of Jews.
Or hypothetically the views on Nameless Person who advocates killing babies:  that's the logical equivalence in application.
In case you did not know we have laws against advocating violence and Sacha came very close to breaching them on national television.
Sacha had a valid question but an invalid preamble to it which I personally would have cut off before he even got to his question.
Unfortunately Stan was a bit late in what he did as the damage was done.
But the real problem here is that this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with morality, logic and laws.


----------



## sptrawler (8 April 2022)

Make of it, what you will.








						Why ABC won't screen Clive Palmer speech at National Press Club live
					

The billionaire - who opposes jab mandates and is unvaccinated himself - is scheduled to launch his United Australia Party's election campaign at the National Press Club at 12.30pm on Tuesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## wayneL (8 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Make of it, what you will.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The ABC is out of order here. No matter what anybody thinks of Clive Palmer or the united Australia party it is now the biggest party in Australia in terms of membership.

That alone deserves equal treatment with the rest the viable parties in this country.

As a matter of full disclosure regarding my opinion on this point, I will probably not be voting for UAP.


----------



## sptrawler (12 April 2022)

Now this is concerning, if it is a reflection on people becoming tone deaf to the ABC message IMO.









						ABC continues its slide as listeners desert Szeps in latest radio ratings
					

Concerns for the national broadcaster as ABC Radio takes a hit in Sydney in the latest radio ratings.




					www.smh.com.au
				




ABC Sydney has posted rating dips across every session in the second radio survey of the year.
In the all-important breakfast slot, James Valentine saw his Sydney audience share drop from 11.6 per cent last survey to 10.7 per cent this survey, according to new data from measurement provider GfK.


----------



## Knobby22 (12 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Now this is concerning, if it is a reflection on people becoming tone deaf to the ABC message IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Always goes up during bushfires, elections etc. Watch next figures.


----------



## IFocus (12 April 2022)

wayneL said:


> The ABC is out of order here. No matter what anybody thinks of Clive Palmer or the united Australia party it is now the biggest party in Australia in terms of membership.
> 
> That alone deserves equal treatment with the rest the viable parties in this country.
> 
> As a matter of full disclosure regarding my opinion on this point, I will probably not be voting for UAP.





Don't know about live but watched it?

TBH could only stomach about 1/2 as he mostly sprouted total BS.

Has he paid his workers at the Qld refinery yet?


----------



## PZ99 (12 April 2022)

If it's not OK for the ABC to repeat Labor lies then presumably they can't repeat UAP lies either.

Equality and all that...


----------



## sptrawler (12 April 2022)

PZ99 said:


> If it's not OK for the ABC to repeat Labor lies then presumably they can't repeat UAP lies either.
> 
> Equality and all that...



That unfortunately is true, equity in a taxpayer funded broadcaster is required, whether it is unsavoury to some or not.
All taxpayers help fund it, some will be Labor, Liberal, Green and UAP voters, all have the right to expect similar representation and access  to the platform.
Unfortunately that seems to have been lost in translation by the ABC, which is a shame and probably one of the reasons they are in constant audience decline, pandering to one sector makes them fully reliant on that audience for their survival. 

It would be interesting if the NBN chose to ostracise and restrict a companies access to the internet, because they don't agree with their social or political agenda, twitter can because it is a private company, whether a public funded company can without showing due cause would be debatable IMO.


----------



## mullokintyre (12 April 2022)

PZ99 said:


> If it's not OK for the ABC to repeat Labor lies then presumably they can't repeat UAP lies either.
> 
> Equality and all that...



I'm all for it.
If we had that policy there would not be a single Political ad or statement from anyone  in the media.
Suit me admirably.
Mick


----------



## wayneL (12 April 2022)

IFocus said:


> Don't know about live but watched it?
> 
> TBH could only stomach about 1/2 as he mostly sprouted total BS.
> 
> Has he paid his workers at the Qld refinery yet?



Totally irrelevant to the point.

I didn't even watch it and I'm not going to. The point is equal treatment of viable candidate parties no matter what their politics are.

I think they should even give the Labor Party and the Greens equal treatment, despite their potential to completely f№k our country up.

That is how a functional democracy works.


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2022)

ABC presenter ‘takes a break’ after accusations of bias
					

A couple of lists on Fauziah Ibrahim’s private Twitter account that appear to show anti-Labor sentiment could spell big trouble for the ABC News presenter.




					www.smh.com.au
				




ABC _Weekend Breakfast_ presenter Fauziah Ibrahim has “taken a break from on-camera duties” while the broadcaster is “reviewing recent social media activity” by her that may constitute a breach of its recently updated guidelines.
Ibrahim, one of the hosts of the ABC TV news program from 7am on Saturdays and Sundays, was absent from the show at the weekend following revelations that her personal Twitter account contained a couple of so-called “shitlists” that appeared to indicate disdain for some of those on the Labor side of politics.


----------



## mullokintyre (26 April 2022)

Funny how the ABC manadarins didn't suspend the catty blonde Laura Tingle over her tweeting that Scomo was guilty of "idealogical Bastardry" , but hey, its their ABC.
Mick


----------



## mullokintyre (28 June 2022)

From the Evil Murdoch Empire



> An academic about to be interviewed by the ABC says he was asked “not to make any anti-China comments” just days after ambassador Xiao Qian visited the broadcaster’s Sydney HQ.
> 
> Malcolm Davis, senior analyst at think tank ASPI, was appearing on Geraldine Doogue’s Radio National program, which was being hosted by Kathryn Robinson, in an interview about space-based solar power.
> 
> ...




Why shoot yourself in foot I keep asking.
Mick


----------



## PZ99 (30 June 2022)

Heh heh.... the alternative is Dr Davis can say whatever he wants and the ABC cop another AFP raid.

I think I"d prefer ABC self regulation thanks.... at least until Peter Dutton loses his seat


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2022)

Happiness and joy returns to the Kingdom. 😂 









						PM says ABC must have greater voice in Indo-Pacific region
					

Speaking at the ABC's 90th anniversary, Anthony Albanese says if the ABC does not have a stronger presence in the Indo-Pacific, others will fill the gap and Australian national security will suffer.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## Knobby22 (7 August 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Happiness and joy returns to the Kingdom. 😂
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Australia needs to show our cultural presence  on the island nations. We used to have Radio Australia amd Australia TV but it was closed down by Abbot.

We need to get it going again  though how we broadcast it now, I don’t know. China owns the equipment we used to have .(and they use it!) Another dumb decision.

As well you know SP, I thought you were the one that alerted us.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2022)

Knobby22 said:


> Australia needs to show our cultural presence  on the island nations. We used to have Radio Australia amd Australia TV but it was closed down by Abbot.
> 
> We need to get it going again  though how we broadcast it now, I don’t know. China owns the equipment we used to have .(and they use it!) Another dumb decision.
> 
> As well you know SP, I thought you were the one that alerted us.



I'm just pleased that the ABC can get back to what they are paid to do, report news and current affairs stories, which affect everyday Australians.
It will be a breath of fresh air, after they have been tied up for the last 10 years, being solely a politically focused news source. 
Maybe they will have interesting current affairs programmes, that will encourage my wife to start watching them again, she isn't interested in politics so hasn't watched the ABC for years. 😂


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2022)

sptrawler said:


> I'm just pleased that the ABC can get back to what they are paid to do, report news and current affairs stories, which affect everyday Australians.
> It will be a breath of fresh air, after they have been tied up for the last 10 years, being solely a politically focused news source.
> Maybe they will have interesting current affairs programmes, that will encourage my wife to start watching them again, she isn't interested in politics so hasn't watched the ABC for years. 😂



I'm sure the ABC will appeal to female viewers in the Solomon's and Fiji, it seems to be run by women these days .


----------

