Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

ABC is Political

Jump to new
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.
 
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
Click to expand...

Do you have evidence to the contrary ?

If not you must have some objection to this subject being reported at all.

Why is that ?
 
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.
 
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 ?
Click to expand...

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.
 
overhang said:
... this isn't good for a stable business and the more conservative choice would be the male.
Click to expand...

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.:cool:
 
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.:cool:
Click to expand...

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.
 
overhang said:
When did I ever mention bias? What I said was they're ramming this sort of political correctness down our throats.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
overhang said:
What I said was they're ramming this sort of political correctness down our throats. .
Click to expand...

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.
 
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;
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
SirRumpole said:
It is in fact an assumption about someone's private life which others probably have no right to make.
Click to expand...

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..:rolleyes:
 
If this is your way of trying to stop me responding, you may correctly assume that you have me by the short and curlies.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to wonder at that preposition too. Aren't we buying our babies from Thailand and India now?
 
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.
 
Top