# Shock Jocks: Why Do We Have Them?



## IFocus (1 October 2012)

After Alan Jones performance of late and having listen to a number of the said Shock Jocks I just wonder why people continue to listen to them?

Is it entertainment value, information value or is it just the emotional buttons they push to enhance their egos and make ridiculous amounts of money from the punters?

Who are their audience? Bogans, bored housewives, bored house-husbands, red necks or university qualified academics.

What age group listens?

Any ideas?


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2012)

They are a response to the Fabian thought police. No topic is off the table and are a necessary catalyst for open thought and debate.

We may be offended from time to time, but refer to Voltaire's composite quotation.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 October 2012)

We don't have them in Melbourne.
Perhaps they are an acquired taste.


----------



## Julia (1 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> We don't have them in Melbourne.



Really?  No radio personality that pushes the politically correct boundaries?
Hard to believe in a city the size of Melbourne.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 October 2012)

Julia said:


> Really?  No radio personality that pushes the politically correct boundaries?
> Hard to believe in a city the size of Melbourne.




Seriously.
We have radio commentators that push the politically correct boundaries but we don't have abusive shock jocks.
They tried to set up a station recently full of them but it failed miserably.


----------



## moXJO (1 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> We don't have them in Melbourne.
> Perhaps they are an acquired taste.




Hinch was down there wasnt he?


----------



## Knobby22 (1 October 2012)

moXJO said:


> Hinch was down there wasnt he?




He wasn't a shock jock, quite liberal in his views in fact.

He did hate child molestors and went to jail for contempt of court a couple of times but I never once heard him mouth off a politician. He was probably the closest thing to one but he has been sacked due to low ratings.

About 15 years ago we had Stan Zeno whatever his name is from Sydney. he crashed and burned within months.


----------



## gav (1 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Seriously.
> We have radio commentators that push the politically correct boundaries but we don't have abusive shock jocks.




We may not have any that have permanent radio positions, but we still have our fair share; like "social commentator" like Catherine Deveny


----------



## Julia (1 October 2012)

gav said:


> We may not have any that have permanent radio positions, but we still have our fair share; like "social commentator" like Catherine Deveny



Ah, but that's different.  Ms Deveny is of the Left.  They can all say whatever they want and it's fine.
Knobby is clearly referring to shock jocks as only ever being of the Right.  Such a pejorative term would never be applied to the other side.

(the above remark should not be interpreted as support for Mr Jones or any of his colleagues at 2GB.)


----------



## gav (1 October 2012)

Sadly Julia, it appears that way.


----------



## drsmith (1 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> What age group listens?
> 
> Any ideas?



I agree with you wholeheartedly.

It's a tragedy we have shock jocks that masquerade as a government.


----------



## Calliope (2 October 2012)

drsmith said:


> I agree with you wholeheartedly.
> 
> It's a tragedy we have shock jocks that masquerade as a government.




It's a tragedy that we have a corrupt government that spawns shock jocks and gives them plenty of oxygen.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 October 2012)

Julia said:


> Ah, but that's different.  Ms Deveny is of the Left.  They can all say whatever they want and it's fine.
> Knobby is clearly referring to shock jocks as only ever being of the Right.  Such a pejorative term would never be applied to the other side.
> 
> (the above remark should not be interpreted as support for Mr Jones or any of his colleagues at 2GB.)




How rude and shock jockish.

She doesn't even have a radio show so I don't see how she qualifies. I dislike her intensely and complained about her to the Age. I think I was one of many as she was dropped from their writers.

We have right radio wing hosts like Tom Elliot on 3AW but he is respectful and has manners. He attacks using logic not name calling.

We don't need shock jocks of any colour. They are the scum of the earth in my view.
It is a lack of civility that spawns them. maybe they don't work in Melbourne because we turn them off while up north they think it is acceptable behaviour.


----------



## Miss Hale (2 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Seriously.
> We have radio commentators that push the politically correct boundaries but we don't have abusive shock jocks.
> They tried to set up a station recently full of them but it failed miserably.




I think part of the reason that station failed was that they had a terrible signal.  I knew many people who would have liked to give them a go but couldn't stand the interefence, especially when driving around parts of Melbourne that had trams. I would also argue that they weren't a station full of shock jocks.

I think it was Stan Zemanek you were referring to in another post but I can't comment on him as I never heard his show. 

What is the definition of shock jocks though? If it's people that whip up the public into a frenzy over issues I would argue the ABC falls into this category.


----------



## McLovin (2 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> What is the definition of shock jocks though? If it's people that whip up the public into a frenzy over issues I would argue the ABC falls into this category.




I don't think you can put Alan Jones, Ray Hadley, Jason Morrison, Chris Smith et al into the same league as the ABC. I think they are all just a bunch of duplicitous idiots with a microphone. I actually listened to them for a while, because they are semi-entertaining in a sort of "will they go there" way but they get very boring because they really have a lot of hot air but not much depth to anything they say. A first year law student could run rings around all of them.

I remember last year Chris Smith on 2GB had a "competition" that asked viewers to ring in and if they could remember the correct number of boat people who had died in that Christmas Island boat tragedy they won an espresso machine. That's pretty disgusting.


----------



## Julia (2 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> What is the definition of shock jocks though? If it's people that whip up the public into a frenzy over issues I would argue the ABC falls into this category.






McLovin said:


> I don't think you can put Alan Jones, Ray Hadley, Jason Morrison, Chris Smith et al into the same league as the ABC.



Agree.  The ABC whips up the frenzy (as Miss Hale describes) in a much more cultured way.   
McLovin, if you'd been listening to ABC Radio, both the Local Radio network and Radio National, over the last couple of days, you'd understand what some of us are so objecting to.  It has been quite beyond belief, especially the airtime given to Roxon et al blaming Tony Abbott for 'spawning the environment that makes it OK for Jones to say what he does'.



> I remember last year Chris Smith on 2GB had a "competition" that asked viewers to ring in and if they could remember the correct number of boat people who had died in that Christmas Island boat tragedy they won an espresso machine. That's pretty disgusting.



Yes it is.  I occasionally listen in the morning and it's all really lowest common denominator stuff.


----------



## basilio (2 October 2012)

I think the shock jock syndrome is the celebration of the loudest, the most obnoxious and the most stupid. It has been extremely effective at dumbing down the population and undermining  logic or evidence based discussion in favour of emotional rants.

It works particularly well for commercial media. Commercial advertisers use loud repeated inane slogans to persuade people to buy their products.  When people have been well prepped by shock jocks  they will more quickly accept the next loud inane message. 

*This is why Alan Jones was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by various advertisers to spruik and support their stories in the cash for comment scandal. *

When the shock-jocks jump onto social or political issues the opportunity to make the wildest comments with no need for evidence or logic lets every shyster in for a shot - particularly if they have the money to pay for the program. In that context you'll find the shock jocks leading the charge against any attempts to challenge social situations if it will impact on a company that is making a lot of money in that field.

Examples? Challenging the poker machine industry.  Disputing the introduction of more restrictions on smoking. essentially  pushing the argument that our freedoms to do anything we want (or someone wants to sell us.. ) are essential,  and that actions to curtail this are socialist nightmares. Does any of this ring true.

And  what is the big one ?


----------



## McLovin (2 October 2012)

Julia said:


> Agree.  The ABC whips up the frenzy (as Miss Hale describes) in a much more cultured way.
> McLovin, if you'd been listening to ABC Radio, both the Local Radio network and Radio National, over the last couple of days, you'd understand what some of us are so objecting to.  It has been quite beyond belief, especially the airtime given to Roxon et al blaming Tony Abbott for 'spawning the environment that makes it OK for Jones to say what he does'.




I've been in your mother country, Julia. Queenstown is absolutely beautiful this time of year and even better I didn't have to listen to either side going at eachother.

Labor had the moral high ground and would have done far better by saying "we don't want to make this political", instead they have tried to flip it back on the Libs. It makes Gillard look bad in that she has allowed that to occur. The Americanis(z)ation of our politics continues...


----------



## Julia (2 October 2012)

McLovin said:


> I've been in your mother country, Julia. Queenstown is absolutely beautiful this time of year



Isn't it though.  Perhaps even more gorgeous in autumn with the changing colours especially amongst the stands of poplar trees.



> Labor had the moral high ground and would have done far better by saying "we don't want to make this political", instead they have tried to flip it back on the Libs. It makes Gillard look bad in that she has allowed that to occur. The Americanis(z)ation of our politics continues...



Labor have imo thoroughly overblown their moral advantage.
The Libs, on the other hand, have failed to adequately stand up to the ridiculous assertions, except for one Mitch Fifield (whom I'd never heard of before) who did make some appropriate rejoinders.

I suppose Tony Abbott et al have decided they won't dignify the nonsense with significant response, but I'd have preferred to see something along the lines of "It's simply illogical to suggest Mr Abbott bears any responsibility for what Mr Jones chooses to say."

What do others think?  Has it been better to largely ignore the attacks?


----------



## wayneL (2 October 2012)

basilio said:


> I think the shock jock syndrome is the celebration of the loudest, the most obnoxious and the most stupid. It has been extremely effective at dumbing down the population and undermining  logic or evidence based discussion in favour of emotional rants.




What an astonishing irony. lol


----------



## Calliope (2 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> What an astonishing irony. lol




Just substitute "GW Alarmist Syndrome" for "shock jock syndrome" and you get basilio.

Rudd's criticism of Jones shows he is  another guy who doesn't know the meaning of irony;  



> "I think what this guy suffers from is absolute delusions of grandeur,


----------



## basilio (2 October 2012)

Ah yes  Wayne again.   The master of aggressive play-the-man abuse chimes in to  completlely ignore my argument and attack me instead.

And why would we expect anything else ? After all this too often represents the shock jock online version of 2GB.


----------



## wayneL (2 October 2012)

basilio said:


> Ah yes  Wayne again.   The master of aggressive play-the-man abuse chimes in to  completlely ignore my argument and attack me instead.
> 
> And why would we expect anything else ? After all this too often represents the shock jock online version of 2GB.



Again, an astonishing irony. lol


----------



## nulla nulla (2 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> We don't have them in Melbourne.
> Perhaps they are an acquired taste.




wasn't that mad kiwi Derrin Huntch in Melbourne?


----------



## nulla nulla (2 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> After Alan Jones performance of late and having listen to a number of the said Shock Jocks I just wonder why people continue to listen to them?
> 
> Is it entertainment value, information value or is it just the emotional buttons they push to enhance their egos and make ridiculous amounts of money from the punters?
> 
> ...




The original poster raised four (4) legitimate questions in respect of "shock Jock" radio presenters. The likes of Jones, Sandilands, Doug, Golden Tonsils, Adams, Hinch and everyone who wants to emulate them. 

Why am I not surprised the the right wing gestapo in this forum endeavour to turn this into yet another labor bashing thread?


----------



## white_goodman (2 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> The original poster raised four (4) legitimate questions in respect of "shock Jock" radio presenters. The likes of Jones, Sandilands, Doug, Golden Tonsils, Adams, Hinch and everyone who wants to emulate them.
> 
> Why am I not surprised the the right wing gestapo in this forum endeavour to turn this into yet another labor bashing thread?




why is anyone in opposite view to your own a gestapo, a denier, a nazi, right wing loonie etc etc

the answer is very simple, we have them because people listen to them, if people didnt listen they would have to change their content or lose their jobs.. as much as the inner city elite reject the idea, alan jones has plenty of listeners..

now for my personal imo, its rubbish and Sir Alan the messiah of conservative values is a hypocrite...


----------



## wayneL (2 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> The original poster raised four (4) legitimate questions in respect of "shock Jock" radio presenters. The likes of Jones, Sandilands, Doug, Golden Tonsils, Adams, Hinch and everyone who wants to emulate them.
> 
> Why am I not surprised the the right wing gestapo in this forum endeavour to turn this into yet another labor bashing thread?




Yet another astonishing irony.

Grist for my PhD mill.


----------



## Happy (2 October 2012)

> Why am I not surprised the the right wing gestapo in this forum endeavour to turn this into yet another labor bashing thread?





Shouldn’t we blame Tony Abbot for that instead? 

As to S-Jocks I often wander why they bother, after so many programs and so many attacks on bad and other things, year by year everything gets worse not better.

Effectively making this high horse talk pointless, suppose it is good enough for them as it pays their wages.


----------



## Julia (2 October 2012)

Happy said:


> Shouldn’t we blame Tony Abbot for that instead?



He has already been thus blamed.



> As to S-Jocks I often wander why they bother, after so many programs and so many attacks on bad and other things, year by year everything gets worse not better.
> 
> Effectively making this high horse talk pointless, suppose it is good enough for them as it pays their wages.




Correct.  They wouldn't exist if there were not a captive audience.  The radio station would not continue to employ them if advertisers weren't prepared to pay big bucks to have them endorse their products.
It's all about business and secondly, about politics.

The present thrust of advertisers deserting the Jones Show will be a temporary phenomenon.  They want to be seen to be upholding the moral high ground.  Soon the fuss will die down and they will be back with their sponsorship via a radio station which brings them the results from the audience they seek.


----------



## Miss Hale (2 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> wasn't that mad kiwi Derrin Huntch in Melbourne?




Knobby replied to an enquiry about Derryn Hinch on page 1 of this thread, he's recently been sacked due to low ratings.  Doesn't necessarily fit into some definitions of shock jock as he had liberal views on some issues.

As to why we have them, as others have said because people listen to them, if they didn't they would disappear.  They don't bother me because I can choose not to listen to them and I'm not paying for them.

A more pertinent question for me is, "The ABC: Why do we have it?".  What is supposed to be an apolitical broadcasting service is now a mouthpiece for the Labor party and I am also paying for it so much more of a concern for me.


----------



## Tink (3 October 2012)

Derryn Hinch is still on 3AW until the end of the year, then he will be going to Channel 7.
I thought he was sacked because of his comments about Steve Vizard.


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

Tink said:


> Derryn Hinch is still on 3AW until the end of the year, then he will be going to Channel 7.
> I thought he was sacked because of his comments about Steve Vizard.




Na...it was his beard. Never trust a man with a beard (probably a radical looney leftie troglidite).


----------



## Calliope (3 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> A more pertinent question for me is, "The ABC: Why do we have it?".  What is supposed to be an apolitical broadcasting service is now a mouthpiece for the Labor party and I am also paying for it so much more of a concern for me.




Gillard and co. are not interested in an apology. What they are after is to destroy a very vocal opponent. His sponsors will soon be back.



> Jones's foes in Canberra fronted the media very speedily indeed to pull off two feats. First, they questioned whether Jones should still be on air. *Labor MPs didn't really want an apology. Their aim is to silence the man by demanding an end to his career. Second, the aim is to conflate Jones's comments with a "culture of extremism and viciousness" within the Liberal Party. That's what Trade Minister Craig Emerson told ABC News Radio on Monday morning.*
> 
> *Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said much the same thing on ABC Radio National a few minutes later. She said Tony Abbott had sent a message that this sort of behaviour was acceptable, part of a pattern within the Liberal Party, piling indignation upon indignation*.



 [My bolds]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...of-the-media/story-e6frg7bo-[/B]1226486869852


----------



## pilots (3 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> Knobby replied to an enquiry about Derryn Hinch on page 1 of this thread, he's recently been sacked due to low ratings.  Doesn't necessarily fit into some definitions of shock jock as he had liberal views on some issues.
> 
> As to why we have them, as others have said because people listen to them, if they didn't they would disappear.  They don't bother me because I can choose not to listen to them and I'm not paying for them.
> 
> A more pertinent question for me is, "The ABC: Why do we have it?".  What is supposed to be an apolitical broadcasting service is now a mouthpiece for the Labor party and I am also paying for it so much more of a concern for me.




How true, lets git rid of the ABC, how would the ALP like that.


----------



## IFocus (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> The original poster raised four (4) legitimate questions in respect of "shock Jock" radio presenters. The likes of Jones, Sandilands, Doug, Golden Tonsils, Adams, Hinch and everyone who wants to emulate them.
> 
> Why am I not surprised the the right wing gestapo in this forum endeavour to turn this into yet another labor bashing thread?





Right Wing Gestapo is a bit strong I think Nulla..............Brown Shirts maybe LOL..........seriously I was hoping for an insight as I find them mind numbing as they run their ignorant and bigoted views bending the facts as required.   Why do people listen?

As for Jones he has long been a poster boy for the Liberals and praised long and hard by most Liberal MP's as Hockey was caught out last night by the project as they quoted his high praise for Jones.
So the politics is that Labor want some of the mud to stick just like the Liberals were happy for the shine to stick coming the other way.

The thing that I find really confronting from Jones that he has made the suggestion of killing a PM. 

This as far as I know has never been done by a public figure before in Australian political history. The Coalition was pretty much silent on the matter

Political violence is not part of the Australian landscape......yet

The comments he has made about Gillards father is just a measurement of his character lack of.


----------



## IFocus (3 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> A more pertinent question for me is, "The ABC: Why do we have it?".  What is supposed to be an apolitical broadcasting service is now a mouthpiece for the Labor party and I am also paying for it so much more of a concern for me.




Mouthpiece for the Labor party? 

Isn't that some thing a shock jock would sprout?


----------



## Calliope (3 October 2012)

white_goodman said:


> why is anyone in opposite view to your own a gestapo, a denier, a nazi, right wing loonie etc etc




Your reply to nulla nulla. The answer is because he fancies himself as a shock poster...a la Alan Jones.


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> Right Wing Gestapo is a bit strong I think Nulla..............Brown Shirts maybe LOL..........seriously I was hoping for an insight as I find them mind numbing as they run their ignorant and bigoted views bending the facts as required.   Why do people listen?
> 
> As for Jones he has long been a poster boy for the Liberals and praised long and hard by most Liberal MP's as Hockey was caught out last night by the project as they quoted his high praise for Jones.
> So the politics is that Labor want some of the mud to stick just like the Liberals were happy for the shine to stick coming the other way.
> ...




You are probably correct in that I could have chosen a better description of the right wing element in this forum rather than describing them as "Gestapo". Truth be known they are more like "Jackboot Stormtroopers" with their single minded right wing perspective and total lack of objectivity. 

I don't listen to Jones or the other shock jocks. They appear to be aimed at the ignorant masses and try to appeal to the audience bias. Don't let the truth get in the way of a good slag off. In my opinion Jones crossed the line with the original suggestion of putting Julia in a chaff bag and taking her out to sea...one way trip. Poor form when you think of the exploits of certain Sydney criminals who did just that in years gone by. We live in very disturbing times when the freedom of speech we take for granted in Australia is extended to recommending the assination of a prime minister. His recent exploits appear to be an expansion of his "theme" Julia liar, only this time he stooped to new lows (admittedly off air). However in this day of video phones he should have been aware nothing he said, despite his young liberal audience, was going to be "confidential". 

The real irony in this, is the opportunity extended to John Laws  by channel 7 to promote his sponsor "Wild Turkey" while commenting on Mr Jones poor form. As Mr Laws said, "it is all about commerce". Morals never get in the way of money. No doubt I will draw more flack for this post from the indignant right.  Life's good.


----------



## wayneL (3 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> Right Wing Gestapo is a bit strong I think Nulla..............Brown Shirts maybe LOL..........seriously I was hoping for an insight as I find them mind numbing as they run their ignorant and bigoted views bending the facts as required.   Why do people listen?




The leftists really don't understand how appallingly hypocritical they are when they say stuff like this. 



> Political violence is not part of the Australian landscape......yet




Oh really?

You don't recall the tent embassy fiasco? Precipitated by members of the left as I recall.



> The comments he has made about Gillards father is just a measurement of his character lack of.




:sleeping:

Yeah yeah yeah, as has been spoken (milked) _ad nauseum_ for days now. Boring.

Not withstanding AJ being a tosser, what of the breach of Chatham House rules and the preposterous blaming of Tones for AJ's comments from the vile verbally violent femmes of the left?

Hypocrisy reigns supreme... as usual.


----------



## wayneL (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> You are probably correct in that I could have chosen a better description of the right wing element in this forum rather than describing them as "Gestapo". Truth be known they are more like "Jackboot Stormtroopers"
> 
> No doubt I will draw more flack for this post from the indignant right.




And deservedly so.

Linking members of this forum with Hitler's regime is way way WAY beyond the pale Nulla. 

Indignant right? Oh my word, have a look in the collective leftist mirror. The left have created a whole industry fro getting all indignant about nothing at all.

You have destroyed your right to criticise AJ or anyone else as what you have said here is actually worse than what AJ said.

Others have mentioned character, you have shown that you have none... and have kicked a massive own goal.

And by the way, I am not of the right.


----------



## moXJO (3 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> The thing that I find really confronting from Jones that he has made the  suggestion of killing a PM.
> 
> This as far as I know has never been done by a public figure before in Australian political history. The Coalition was pretty much silent on the matter
> 
> ...




Wow you have a short memory. Union members called for the death of howard as did gun owners.  Howard copped a lot more abuse in his time. Are you really that blind or just pushing the leftie bs


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> And deservedly so.
> 
> Linking members of this forum with Hitler's regime is way way WAY beyond the pale Nulla.
> 
> ...




I note that once again you have been selective in quoting from my post. Foprtunately in Australia we have freedom of speech (regardles of our origins). Jackboot Stormtroopers are not exclusive to nazi germany but you are free, in Australia, to twist my comments or express you opinion in anyway you prefer.

I find it sweet that you refer to Mr Jones in such a familiar manner as "AJ". I leave everyone else to draw their own conclusions and I make the point that I am not making in inferences in mentioning your choice of expression, allegiances or association.  

My right to criticise is inherent (please forgive my lowbrow spelling) in the right of Freedom of Speech where I have not libelled or slandered anyone. As to my character, your perspective, well established from the consistancy of your posts is hardly likely to concern me in the least. I make the point that I have not singled you or any other forum member out to cast aspersion against the character of any individual poster. If anything you have outed yourself by the vehemence of your post.

I sleep well of a night and am not worried by bully boys of any political or national persuasion.


----------



## Julia (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> The real irony in this, is the opportunity extended to John Laws  by channel 7 to promote his sponsor "Wild Turkey" while commenting on Mr Jones poor form. As Mr Laws said, "it is all about commerce". Morals never get in the way of money.



Mr Laws, in his interview, was at least candid, as your quoted comment above shows.  If  "7.30" chose to provide him with a platform, more fool they.



> No doubt I will draw more flack for this post from the indignant right.  Life's good.



This comment suggests that you are writing the post to provoke comment from those who perhaps take a more objective view.  Genuinely felt comments would earn considerably more respect.



nulla nulla said:


> I find it sweet that you refer to Mr Jones in such a familiar manner as "AJ". I leave everyone else to draw their own conclusions and I make the point that I am not making in inferences in mentioning your choice of expression, allegiances or association.



Oh, stop being so precious.  Of course you're making some pejorative inference.
I don't suppose you considered for a moment that the use of the initials 'AJ' might have been nothing more than a saving of typing, given it's entirely clear to whom the poster was referring.
You are becoming as silly as the politicians you admire with such irrelevant observations.


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

Julia said:


> Mr Laws, in his interview, was at least candid, as your quoted comment above shows.  If  "7.30" chose to provide him with a platform, more fool they.




Agreed, just more of channel 7 stirring the pot and sensationalising



> This comment suggests that you are writing the post to provoke comment from those who perhaps take a more objective view.  Genuinely felt comments would earn considerably more respect.




My initial post pointed out that once again the thread was highjacked by those of an anti labor persuasion. My further posts have only been in response to those posts directed to me.



> Oh, stop being so precious.  Of course you're making some pejorative inference.
> I don't suppose you considered for a moment that the use of the initials 'AJ' might have been nothing more than a saving of typing, given it's entirely clear to whom the poster was referring.
> You are becoming as silly as the politicians you admire with such irrelevant observations.




If you read too much into it that is your problem not mine. Your defence of the "AJ" supporters is not unexpected and it is also you right to express it. As to the politicians I admire, they are all retired and the present lot, regardless of party leave a lot to be desired.


----------



## wayneL (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> If you read too much into it that is your problem not mine.




Likewise.


----------



## Julia (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> As to the politicians I admire, they are all retired and the present lot, regardless of party leave a lot to be desired.



I doubt you'll find anyone here who will argue with you on that.


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> Likewise.




How is your thesis going?


----------



## nulla nulla (3 October 2012)

For the record, the John Laws interview was on channel 2, the 7.30 report on Tuesday night, and was replayed by channel 7 on "Sunrise" news etc today.  Apologies for the error.


----------



## wayneL (3 October 2012)

nulla nulla said:


> How is your thesis going?




My original hypothesis proved to be stunningly accurate with no revisions necessary. It has passed peer (shock jocks) review with flying colours and the Vatican is considering entering it into its official cannon.

Most people have responded with "well DUHHH! We could have told you that!"

However I suppose much science is obvious, it just needs to be quantified and labelled.

A bit like the "discovery" of gravity.

::


----------



## Miss Hale (3 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> Mouthpiece for the Labor party?
> 
> Isn't that some thing a shock jock would sprout?




I wouldn't know, I don't listen to them.  It's my assessment of what the ABC has become.  If you consider a comment like that shock jock material then your definition is very wide.


----------



## dutchie (4 October 2012)

News anchor on TV this morning after an item about the Jones affair:
Words to this effect - "Ah.. political controversy - *we love it"*

The "we" here, I think, is the TV station, the viewers, the media and the general public.

Controversy and nastiness between politicians sells better than the discussion about policies.

The reality is that the media loves it, the public loves it - so that is what we get!


----------



## Calliope (4 October 2012)

John Laws is way past his use by date.

[video]http://video.heraldsun.com.au/2286215521/John-Laws-gets-remixed[/video]


----------



## stewiejp (4 October 2012)

I always thought "AJ" was Alan Jones of motor racing fame, F1 1980 World champion.


----------



## IFocus (5 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> I wouldn't know, I don't listen to them.  It's my assessment of what the ABC has become.  If you consider a comment like that shock jock material then your definition is very wide.




ABC breakfast on 720 WA hosted by ex Federal Liberal MP...................rates very highly, mouthpiece for the Labor party?


----------



## IFocus (5 October 2012)

Calliope said:


> John Laws is way past his use by date.
> 
> [video]http://video.heraldsun.com.au/2286215521/John-Laws-gets-remixed[/video]




Wasn't it great he had to be having a joke.....surely.......he not that deluded is he?


----------



## IFocus (5 October 2012)

moXJO said:


> Wow you have a short memory. Union members called for the death of howard as did gun owners.  Howard copped a lot more abuse in his time. Are you really that blind or just pushing the leftie bs




I know Howard collected plenty of flack and threat's particularly over gun laws and the unions were certainly sticking it to him over work-non choices but don't recall public figures (union official's or gun association officials)suggesting he should be killed and dumped in a chaff bag or the like but happy to be proven wrong.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> ABC breakfast on 720 WA hosted by ex Federal Liberal MP...................rates very highly, mouthpiece for the Labor party?




Some people don't weant a diversity of views, they want their view only.
By the way here is a list of where ABC staff go to work when they leave.

ABC to Labor:

Maxine McKew, Mike Bailey, 
Deborah O’Neill, 
David Hill, 
Bob Carr, 
Mary Delahunty,
John Bowler, 
Clare Martin, 
Malarndirri McCarthy
Neville Oliver
Diana Warnock
Ian Baker
And here are some of the ABC staff who went on to be Labor staffers: Mark Bannerman was a journalist for 30 years, working on several programs for the ABC, such as AM, PM, The World Today and Background Briefing. He also worked as an adviser to the-then Labor minister for industry, technology and commerce Senator John Button. Barrie Cassidy is the current host of Insiders on the ABC; he was Bob Hawke’s press secretary from 1986 to 1991. Kerry O’Brien is the former host of the 7.30 Report on the ABC and the present host of the current affairs show Four Corners.  He worked as the press secretary for Labor’s Gough Whitlam. Jeremi Moule, worked for ABC news then later became a minder for the ALP.

ABC to the Coalition

Sarah Henderson, 
Dai Le, 
Gary Hardgrave, a former minister in the Howard government, is a former journalist with the Brisbane bureau of the ABC’s 7.30 Report.

Peter Collins, leader of the Liberal Party in NSW for several years, was also a former ABC TV journalist.

Pru Goward, a Canberra-based high-profile ABC journalist, who reported on federal politics for several years.  She is currently the Liberal representative for the state seat of Goulburn, NSW.

Rob Messenger was an ABC radio broadcaster in Bundaberg.  He then went on to become the National Party member for Burnett in the Queensland Parliament. 
Grant Woodhams, National Party member for Greenough in WA, worked with ABC radio in Tasmania, South Australia, NSW and Victoria.
Eoin Cameron, the former Liberal member for the federal seat of Stirling, presents the breakfast program on ABC local radio in Perth.
Cameron Thompson worked for the ABC in Longreach and Darwin before winning the federal seat of Blair for the Liberal Party.

Scott Emerson, a former ABC journalist, won the Queensland state Parliament seat of Indooroopilly for the Liberal National Party.

Ian Cover, a member of the ABC’s Coodabeen Champions, served as a Liberal member of the Victorian Parliament between 1996 and 2002.

Peter McArthur, a former current affairs reporter and TV newsreader for the ABC, served several years in the Victorian state Parliament as a Liberal member.

Bruce Webster was a sports broadcaster for the ABC and later the Liberal member for Pittwater in the NSW Parliament.

Peter Kennedy, worked for ABC news then was later the unsuccessful liberal candiate for the seat of Bendigo.

And here are some of the ABC staff who went on to be Coalition staffers: Michael Duffy, presented Counterpoint on ABC’s Radio National, he now works for the NSW Liberal government. Chris Wordsworth, after resigning as ABC Queensland state director in 2008, became a Coalition staffer. Cathy Job, a current affairs presenter for ABC radio in Brisbane, became a media adviser to David Kemp after resigning from the ABC. Vicki Thompson, a senior political reporter for ABC radio in Adelaide, became chief of staff for John Olsen, Liberal premier of South Australia. Chris Nicholls, an Adelaide ABC journalist, went on to work for Liberal Senator Grant Chapman. Jim Bonner, after leaving the staff of Malcolm Fraser, held senior editorial positions with ABC radio and television in Canberra and Adelaide.  He later assumed the position of director of the Liberal Party in South Australia. Ken Crooke, state director of the National Party for 13 years, and a close associate of Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen, was an ABC journalist before taking up his position with the National Party. Mark Tobin, the veteran ABC 702 state political reporter who left the public broadcaster to work as a media adviser to NSW premier Barry O’Farrell. Josephine Cafagna, former State 7.30 Report presenter went onto become head of strategic communications for Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu. (And while it’s going the other way, we feel obliged to include ABC Managing Director Mark Scott on this list - in his younger times he worked for then NSW Liberal education minister Terry Metherell). Allen Callaghan, a former Brisbane ABC staffer, became the late Queensland premier Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersens media adviser.

Doesn't seem very balanced, way too many people working for the Libs.


Read the full article below.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/06/25/speaking-of-media-independence-how-does-aunty-fare/


----------



## Knobby22 (5 October 2012)

I don't think any shock jocks have ended up in the Liberal Party as MPs. Shows they do have standards.


----------



## dutchie (5 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Doesn't seem very balanced, way too many people working for the Libs.
> 
> 
> Read the full article below.
> http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/06/25/speaking-of-media-independence-how-does-aunty-fare/




Interesting, I would have thought it would be the other way round.


----------



## Calliope (5 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Doesn't seem very balanced, way too many people working for the Libs.




Obviously their ABC indoctrination failed.


----------



## moXJO (5 October 2012)

IFocus said:


> I know Howard collected plenty of flack and threat's particularly over gun laws and the unions were certainly sticking it to him over work-non choices but don't recall public figures (union official's or gun association officials)suggesting he should be killed and dumped in a chaff bag or the like but happy to be proven wrong.




No you are correct (and I'm to lazy to trawl). Howard was wearing a bullet proof vest at one stage (1996?) and had to have extra security around his home. Howard and Peter Reith copped a lot of death threats during the 97-98 waterfront dispute. But can't put a finger on public figures that joked about wanting him topped.


----------

