The main stream media MSM have a duty to report under the ethics of journalism, and this is what I believe has been broached.
gg
I bow before thee, anyone who can drag a doubleB and a dog, has my respeck.
No mate. I'm not talking about driving rigs. I'm talking about loading 50 kilogram bags of sugar on your head all day and stacked into 90 foot containers.
Save your bows for your friends!
By the way I don't accept my discussions were a "rant" and if we are trying to keep this civil can you please retract that comment. It was unnecessary and belittling .
Mofra, my point was not at all about comparing Q & A with any other programs or any other media. It was purely about the balance on one television program which purports to offer balanced political views. Unless both the audience and the questions display such a 50/50 balance, the program is biased and unbalanced in my view, especially with Tony Jones's clear bias to the Left.I think you have misinterpreted.
60/40 (presuming those figures are correct) would make it possibly the most balanced outlet of political discussion in Australia.
Given the prevalence of right wing tabloid media outlets & talkback radio, anything that presents anything less that a large bias to one side balances the equation should be encouraged.
Comments about Tony Jones are, again, subjective Julia
Good demonstration of the point, Duckman. You'd never have seen John Howard or Paul Keating clowning around on a media bus.One of the most enduring (and embarrassing) images of the last election campaign was of Julia Gillard climbing aboard the media bus, laughing and flirting with Mark Riley, passing out lollies to Malcolm Farr and generally watching a bunch of journos acting like kids on a school excursion.
Stunts like that are demeaning to the position of Prime Minister and like-wise the journalists lose credibility. I remember at the time that both the Labour party and the media promoted the story saying that ..."it shows that Julia Gillard is a real person..... her personality came out today". Well you can't have it both ways.......you are either an ordinary person or you are the Prime Minister. The inherent respect that comes with the position of Prime Minister won't stick if the behaviour of the Prime Minster is not worthy of it.
Duckman
Oh, Knobby, how about a little objectivity? What about all the bullying that goes on all the time from the climate change enthusiasts toward anyone who dares to raise a question about it? Where they are scornfully labelled in the most derisive tones 'climate change deniers' in a tone reminiscent of the "holocaust deniers".You can understand how school bullying occurs when you read this thread.
Might be good to let gg speak for himself, don't you think?Alan Jones bullies the prime minister.
GG says that it is wrong, I think he is also hinting for some members here to act more honourably.
Why do you feel the need to label anyone on this forum who happens to have an opinion different from your own, and who happens to agree with some other members, with pejorative and critical terminology?Certain people set the tone here say it is right to treat the Prime Minister badly and then others do their dirty work and do worse than Allan Jones. In other word pack behaviour.
Basilio, your own politics are well known on this forum, particularly with regard to climate. I agree with Wayne that it's disappointing that you have turned the discussion on respect for the PM to your own hobby horse.Knobby22 is quite right.( IMO) to point out that current political debate has been reduced to bullying tactics. And this behavior has become part of the social/political discussion in Australia as well as USA. This forum is too often a microcosm of that behaviour.
No, Basilio, I don't think you can reasonably claim only one side was trying to have a debate just because not everyone agreed with you.Knobby is accurate too in pointing out that I and many other members don't waste our time any more trying to have thoughtful discussions on many big issues. I did put in a considerable effort earlier on but came to the conclusion only one side was trying to have a debate.
The 'ramblings of some million idiot celebrities and relentless consumer pump priming", yet you talk of 'bullying' by others when you use language like this???With regard to the big issues of climate change and the urgent need to create a more sustainable lifestyle before we irrevocably trash the only home we have..
If anyone actually reads what historians, environmental scientists, climate scientists, geographers and many other experts have to say it becomes abundantly clear that the way we are currently living cannot continue. It is unsustainable. It will fail the way scores of other civilizations failed when they destroyed the resource base they were living in. Except this time of course we are trashing the whole house not just one room. And yet the issue is lost under the ramblings of some million idiot celebrities and relentless consumer pump priming.
...I don't mind anyone having a shot at any politician on any subject and good luck if they trap them but the crude rudeness that's been displayed along with the hate message has not historically been a part of the Australian media and nor should it be.
Its interesting reading the bias claims, being socially left of the communist party I fail to see basis of the claims. I think that most of the commentary is actually fairly central with very few who are genuinely left.
Knobby was highlighting the fact that currently too many discussion on this forum have disintegrated into simplistic bullying. I was expanding that into looking at how our society in general is going in that direction and used a couple of examples.
It's a little bit - what goes around comes around. The far Left had a visceral and unrelenting hatred of John Howard, and paid out on him mercilessly. Sure, two wrongs don't make a right, but if you step up to the plate in federal politics, that's how it goes down....Now, if Abbott had got in as PM, I would imagine the lefties would be slinging insults left, right and centre. Howard copped a lot of ribbing and name calling too. So why should it be any different to a feminist PM? Feminists want to be seen as equal to men, so why would Ms Gillard want to be treated differentlly?...
The likes of Jones and co are simply dogs chasing dollars and their inflated egos. Unfortunately they are surrounded by the usually howling pack helping them to achieve both.
They care little about public standards, they reinforce bad behavior and bigoted standards in the community as being OK.
I don't mind anyone having a shot at any politician on any subject and good luck if they trap them but the crude rudeness that's been displayed along with the hate message has not historically been a part of the Australian media and nor should it be.
Its interesting reading the bias claims, being socially left of the communist party I fail to see basis of the claims. I think that most of the commentary is actually fairly central with very few who are genuinely left.
Respect should be given where respect is due.
If Ross Garnaut's latest suggestion gets up, 1/2 of what gets taken from our wallets we will get back as tax cuts (net of social redistribution of course) and only the other half will be flushed down the toilet.
(my bolds)Why do we usually forgive new prime ministers so much? Because we chose them, generally, and just as a proud new car owner steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the slight heaviness of the vehicle's steering or the idiotic tininess of its glovebox, so do we tend to give our new PMs the benefit of the doubt, for the first year or two.
But Julia Gillard is in a different position. First appointed to the prime ministership by Caucus and then reappointed, post-election, by a misshapen committee of independents, she does not enjoy the subtle protection of a sentimental bond with her electors.
She is a new prime minister, without that "New Prime Minister" smell.
It's a little bit - what goes around comes around. The far Left had a visceral and unrelenting hatred of John Howard, and paid out on him mercilessly. Sure, two wrongs don't make a right, but if you step up to the plate in federal politics, that's how it goes down.
Gillard can sob into her air travel Gold Pass and lifelong pension.
Howard was never ever as I recall treated with the sheer arrogance and contempt by any sections of the media that the RW shock jocks do to Gillard.
Fact is they perpetrate haft truths and lies
It may be the decent thing to do, but decency is beyond the Greens that Labor is in bed with.IMO, the only way she can redeem even a little credibility would be to honour Swan's promise of "not in this term" and let the people decide. Surely, that is the decent thing to do.
Fact is they perpetrate haft truths and lies
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?