ABC is Political

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

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.

Click to expand...

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?

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?

Click to expand...

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

What next, ISIS/ISIL head honcho interviewed next week on Q&A?

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.

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.


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?
Like anyone else probably

2. Were the program’s producers aware of his background?
Most likely they were by the substance of his question

3. What process did they go through to approve his involvement?
Same process they do for anyone else

4. How did Q&A decide that he could ask a question?
Same process they do for anyone else

5. Did they know what his question would be?
Of course they do

6. What was the reasoning for letting him ask a question?
Because it's relevant to a current issue

7. Will Tony Jones and Q&A apologise to Steve Ciobo and/or the audience for what unfolded?
Why should they ? , Ciobo got his say

8. What changes will be made to prevent this from happening again?
Why should they make any changes ? Letting people ask questions is not an endorsement of the questioner's viewpoint

9. Will the show’s staff be disciplined for the “error in judgment” in allowing Zaky Mallah to be on the program?
See above

10. Will this controversy jeopardise the program’s future?
Why should it ?

ellen.whinnett@news.com.au

Click to expand...

....

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.


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

Click to expand...

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 café 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.

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

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

Click to expand...

I can sympathise with that viewpoint comrade

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

Click to expand...

Yes....I remember seeing you in the audience, sitting on your mothers lap.

I remember when we had free speech.

MrBurns said:

We are just asking to be attacked and we will be eventually.

Click to expand...

and that's the crux of the situation.

noco said:

Yes....I remember seeing you in the audience, sitting on your mothers lap.

Click to expand...

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

Knobby22 said:

I remember when we had free speech.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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

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.

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

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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

Click to expand...

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.