ABC is Political

[Some Dude]

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.

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]

That question is about as legitimate as -

Will Julia Gillard continue to tell lies ?

Likely
Unlikely
Not sure

each answer indicates it might happen.

So you're asserting that it is the question that is the problem, not the available choices?

 

[FlyingFox]

Likely is a good as "yes"

ergo unlikely is as good as no.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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]

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?

Unlikely is defined as improbable not absolutely NO

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]

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]

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.

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]

Well, thanks for your well thought out and expressed opinion.

I'm always happy to prick inflated egos.

 

[Some Dude]

I'm always happy to prick inflated egos.

Read the analysis on media slant yet?

 

[MrBurns]

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]

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.



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.

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]

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.

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:

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]

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]

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.