Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

When Memes become poisonous

Jump to new
basilio said:
I suggest that the meme is the problem. Lets take its application closer to home.

View attachment 162636

Then I realised he was reading Aussie Stock Forum.

As I said earlier that sort of statement with the picture of the elderly couple would be a incredibly offensive and unfair to ASF posters and incidental readers. I explained why I thought the meme was so effective earlier. Would we accept such a defamatory depiction - particularly if it destroyed other people respect for us ? For instance would Joe countenance such a meme on the front page of the website ?

In 2023 we have politicians like Donald Trump who ruthlessly use abusive and defamatory language at judges and legal officers to destroy public respect for the people and their office. I suppose because he gets away with it the assumption is "Why not be a xick ?" "Whose gonna stop me ?" And if I can destroy the reputation of someone I despise or who is standing in my way lets go for it.

I realise that ASF has no censor power over the net. Having said that we can individually, collectively or as operators say this is not acceptable on this forum. We can challenge the meme, call out the defamation.

Or it can be accepted in the name of Free (defamatory, insulting, demeaning) Speech.
Click to expand...
Ok lets take one of your statements today as an example:

The difference is that Morrison never ever acknowledged the need to move rapidly to decarbonisation of energy supply

The last Government set in place the Snowy 2 project, the HV transmission roll out to the NW Victoria/SW NSW to facilitate renewable access, they initiated the Marinus link project and the Tasmanian battery of the nation project.
They started the Kurri Kurri gas power station construction.
The last 10 years has seen Australia have one of the highest renewable grid penetrations in the World and are actually at the forefront of developing the technical knowledge and equipment to control it.

Yet you say they never acknowledged the need to decarbonise, obviously there are no mirrors in your house, you openly tell porkies then criticise others for doing exactly that.
Ironic, let's be honest you love to criticise, as long as you decide who it is focused on, which is typical these days.

How much has the new Government done toward the decarbonisation of energy, in 1 1/2 years, other than talk a lot and promise a lot?

Nothing new has been announced, except targets, wish lists and probable taxpayer funding of coal fired power stations and how much outrage is there. Zip. :roflmao:

I'm not having a go at you, just trying to show that being offended is very subjective, someone posts up a meme that offends you and you may post up a meme, cartoon, comment that offends others.
As long as they highlight a perceived issue that the poster wishes, they are open for discussion, that's how a forum works.
 
Last edited:
basilio said:
Rumpy there is no "totally unbiased account of national and world events". There never can be. There never will be. That is an impossible demand to make.
Click to expand...
Sure, but it's reasonable to expect a national broadcaster to be as neutral as possible.

In the context of employment I've been present at various media conferences and so on so I've seen what goes on first hand. Suffice to say I know it well enough that if the original comments are x then it's entirely predictable how each of the TV stations will report it and what will be published in newspapers. It's entirely predictable which aspects of the story will be covered and what slant will be put on them and there's only one reason for that, they're all biased.

I've seen it done where the TV news report showed the Minister speaking but the actual news report didn't just change what they said but went well beyond that. The news story was on a completely different subject with no mention, at all, of the subject discussed at the media conference. Now that's really getting ridiculous. It wasn't the ABC who did that for the record, it was one of the commercial TV stations.

Neither the ABC nor News Corp are the ones I'd cite as most problematic for the record. Both do at least report something fairly close to what was said. They might display bias by leaving bits out or choosing where to place the story, one might give it the headline whilst the other buries it with a brief mention, but at least they do consistently cover it and they don't make things up.

As for the most problematic one, well I'm only half joking when I refer to it as the Daily Climate. No prizes for guessing what issue they absolutely hammer and yes they most certainly do go as far as running stories about "news" that simply did not occur. Well, OK, perhaps it occurred as such but they report it as current news repeatedly for months, creating the impression of being an ongoing thing when in truth someone said it once and that was months ago.

If forced to evaluate Australian media, I'd actually pick the ABC and News Corp as between them the best of a bad bunch. Pay attention to both and between them you'll get reasonable coverage - neither actually makes up news, at least I haven't seen them do it, and if someone of note says something they do report it at least somewhere.

Just be sure to look for News Corp's paid advertorials and the ABC's inclusion of general stories along with the news and in both cases realise these aren't actual news. They're the equivalent of finding potato chips in the health food aisle - just realise they're not actual health food but placing them there was no accident, oh no it wasn't.... :2twocents
 
Last edited:
Just another thought on the decline of the ABC.

I watched QandA last night and the subject of nuclear energy arose.

Among those on the panel were the Minister and his shadow as expected, but also a 17 year old 'activist' for nuclear energy, not even out of school and much more an open mouth than an open mind.

Wouldn't you think it might be a good idea to have an actual nuclear scientist on the panel (I'm sure that there are some around) to give us the engineering facts instead of the uneducated opinions of those welded to one side of the argument ?

I'm afraid it's just another example of how irrelevant the ABC is becoming.
 
Been a long term ABC consumer. Friend of the ABC in fact.

While always to the left it used to be OK because you always knew the slant in the Commentary reporting.

The past 5 years it has been way too much over the top to the point of irrelevance.

Really wish we could get back fairness and objectivity back in the ABC.

Haven't got a Meme to illustrate this.
 
SirRumpole said:
Just another thought on the decline of the ABC.

I watched QandA last night and the subject of nuclear energy arose.

Among those on the panel were the Minister and his shadow as expected, but also a 17 year old 'activist' for nuclear energy, not even out of school and much more an open mouth than an open mind.

Wouldn't you think it might be a good idea to have an actual nuclear scientist on the panel (I'm sure that there are some around) to give us the engineering facts instead of the uneducated opinions of those welded to one side of the argument ?

I'm afraid it's just another example of how irrelevant the ABC is becoming.
Click to expand...
Just a definitive example would be Insiders and the amount of interruptions a Liberal pollie gets compared to the Green/Labour.
 
Its really interesting to hear some peoples observations of how the see the ABC as somehow more left leaning and wish it would go back to "fairness and objectivity".

I have a different observation. I believe the ABC has become more and more centrist in the past decade. If anything the old presenters like Kerry O'Brien have not been replaced with anyone similar. But what has happened is that the Liberals have become far more right wing echoing the US Republician trend in politics. All of politics has been moved to the Right.

So in 2023 we have a relatively centre-right ALP with the original left wing components splitting off to support the Greens.

Historically the Liberal side of politics had a broad church. There was strong moderate component and then the more Conservative elements. The last 15-20 years however has seen the decimation of most of the Liberal moderates and replaced with a mixture of Right wing hard liners and a militant Christian right section modeled on the US evangelicals.

In this new political world we see the rise of the Independent Liberals (Teals) and the rise of even more extreme Right wing groups like One Nation. UAP and other groups again following the tracks of US politics.

Politic discourse has gone from debating ideas (policies) and practices (governance) to three word slogans and determined efforts to destroy democratic systems as they currently exist.

The ABC is still the the most balanced media platform in Australia. The last 20 years however has seen a massive collapse in the number of mainstream media outlets. NEWS Ltd is by far the biggest commercial media group and has taken the most combative political approach of all the media. In that context they do everything in their power to undermine the credibility and reach of the public broadcaster the ABC which has a remit to be "fair and inpartial"

News Com has no such remit and can be relied on to use all its considerable media presence to attack non Liberal parties. It also is a strong supporter of the more extreme political positions.

So back to the meme. Other memes I have seen make some sort of particular attack on a person or party or position. This one IMV is significantly different.

It defames a whole media group, the ABC and then ridicules anyone who follows that news source. This is extreme politics on steroids. But it seems that the march of politics to the extremes has been so effective this sort of labelling is acceptable or even reasonable on ASF. The cry of Free Speech is invoked to defend the right for this post.

I think reality and respect should trump the right to lie and destroy.
 
This story illustrates how the extreme views in Australian politics are affecting public discourse on the voice.

Coalition frontbencher condemns anti-voice rallies as ‘shameless’ attempt to push ‘extreme causes’​

James Paterson warns fellow no voters against attending events promoted by pro-Kremlin activist Simeon Boikov

Daniel Hurst, Sarah Basford Canales and Josh Butler
Wed 20 Sep 2023 17.57 AESTLast modified on Wed 20 Sep 2023 21.04 AEST


A senior Coalition frontbencher has warned fellow no voters against attending anti-voice rallies promoted by a pro-Kremlin activist, arguing the events are a “shameless” attempt to push “wacky and extreme causes”.
Simeon Boikov, who uses the online persona “the Aussie Cossack”, is among those promoting “no to the voice” rallies around Australia this Saturday, including a major rally in Sydney featuring federal senator Ralph Babet and former MP Craig Kelly.

The shadow minister for home affairs, James Paterson, who opposes the voice, distanced himself from the planned rallies and urged people to avoid being drawn into causes such as supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Cabinet minister Jason Clare also was critical of the events being “organised inside the Russian consulate”, a reference to Boikov who has been living in the Russian consulate in Sydney since late last year, seeking refuge after police sought him in connection with the alleged assault of a man at a pro-Ukraine rally.

Boikov was a prominent figure in last year’s anti-vaccine mandate convoy to Canberra, part of a contingent of live-streamers who broadcast for hours from protests. Boikov was invited into Kelly’s office as part of a “delegation” of protesters. Kelly was also billed as a special guest for the 2021 “Freedom Ball” promoted by Boikov.

The rallies are being promoted in online groups which previously focused on anti-vaccine, anti-lockdown and Covid scepticism sentiment. Many such groups have pivoted to focus criticism on the voice referendum.

www.theguardian.com

Coalition frontbencher condemns anti-voice rallies as ‘shameless’ attempt to push ‘extreme causes’

James Paterson warns fellow no voters against attending events promoted by pro-Kremlin activist Simeon Boikov
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 

Attachments

  • 2658.jpg
    2658.jpg
    26.4 KB · Views: 4
basilio said:
This story illustrates how the extreme views in Australian politics are affecting public discourse on the voice.

Coalition frontbencher condemns anti-voice rallies as ‘shameless’ attempt to push ‘extreme causes’​

James Paterson warns fellow no voters against attending events promoted by pro-Kremlin activist Simeon Boikov

Daniel Hurst, Sarah Basford Canales and Josh Butler
Wed 20 Sep 2023 17.57 AESTLast modified on Wed 20 Sep 2023 21.04 AEST


A senior Coalition frontbencher has warned fellow no voters against attending anti-voice rallies promoted by a pro-Kremlin activist, arguing the events are a “shameless” attempt to push “wacky and extreme causes”.
Simeon Boikov, who uses the online persona “the Aussie Cossack”, is among those promoting “no to the voice” rallies around Australia this Saturday, including a major rally in Sydney featuring federal senator Ralph Babet and former MP Craig Kelly.

The shadow minister for home affairs, James Paterson, who opposes the voice, distanced himself from the planned rallies and urged people to avoid being drawn into causes such as supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Cabinet minister Jason Clare also was critical of the events being “organised inside the Russian consulate”, a reference to Boikov who has been living in the Russian consulate in Sydney since late last year, seeking refuge after police sought him in connection with the alleged assault of a man at a pro-Ukraine rally.

Boikov was a prominent figure in last year’s anti-vaccine mandate convoy to Canberra, part of a contingent of live-streamers who broadcast for hours from protests. Boikov was invited into Kelly’s office as part of a “delegation” of protesters. Kelly was also billed as a special guest for the 2021 “Freedom Ball” promoted by Boikov.

The rallies are being promoted in online groups which previously focused on anti-vaccine, anti-lockdown and Covid scepticism sentiment. Many such groups have pivoted to focus criticism on the voice referendum.

www.theguardian.com

Coalition frontbencher condemns anti-voice rallies as ‘shameless’ attempt to push ‘extreme causes’

James Paterson warns fellow no voters against attending events promoted by pro-Kremlin activist Simeon Boikov
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Oh look out it's the Russians.

Where have we heard that before....


The left have reached a point of insanity. I think that's why there is a rejection of anything they have come up with. It simply doesn't stack up with reality as we have seen over and over again.
 
moXJO said:
Oh look out it's the Russians.

Where have we heard that before....


The left have reached a point of insanity. I think that's why there is a rejection of anything they have come up with. It simply doesn't stack up with reality as we have seen over and over again.
Click to expand...

Did you read that story to discover it was " a total beat up" or do you just make up this xhit because you feel like it ?
You do realise it was a Coalition Shadow Minister who made the statement not "some crazy lefty".:rolleyes:
 
basilio said:
This story illustrates how the extreme views in Australian politics are affecting public discourse on the voice.
Click to expand...
Exactly, as this extreme view is affecting public discourse on the transition to renewables.

www.afr.com

Replacing coal with nuclear would cost $387b, says Chris Bowen

Replacing coal-fired power stations with small nuclear reactors would cost $387 billion, Chris Bowen says, but that assumes no role for private enterprise.
www.afr.com www.afr.com

Who said nuclear has to replace ALL coal fired power stations, you only need enough to supply firming capacity for the renewables, it may in fact be very few at call generators that are required.

But that's politics, don't let the truth, get in the way of great BS when trying to develop a narrative. ;)
 
basilio said:
........
Historically the Liberal side of politics had a broad church. There was strong moderate component and then the more Conservative elements. The last 15-20 years however has seen the decimation of most of the Liberal moderates and replaced with a mixture of Right wing hard liners and a militant Christian right section modeled on the US evangelicals.
.........

I think reality and respect should trump the right to lie and destroy.
Click to expand...
Anyone that truly believes this is beyond the ability to reason with . ( And then write the last line)

I am ➡️🚪
 
UMike said:
Anyone that truly believes this is beyond the ability to reason with . ( And then write the last line)

I am ➡️🚪
Click to expand...

Wow UMike. Don't hold back.. :)
Might be an idea to actually quote all the relevant comments I made rather than just cheery pick and mislead.

I'm truly fascinated that you so completely disagree with the analysis I made of the changing political composition of the Liberal Party. Sad..
 
basilio said:
Historically the Liberal side of politics had a broad church. There was strong moderate component and then the more Conservative elements. The last 15-20 years however has seen the decimation of most of the Liberal moderates and replaced with a mixture of Right wing hard liners and a militant Christian right section modeled on the US evangelicals.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Today's Liberal Party is nothing like the one that existed historically.

basilio said:
So in 2023 we have a relatively centre-right ALP with the original left wing components splitting off to support the Greens.
Click to expand...
As a practical observation, the overwhelming majority of criticism I've heard directed at the ALP could be summed up as saying they've done something similar to the Liberals, radically transforming from the "workers' party" they once were, to a party that's focused on the city-centric Left.

Workers in general aren't that far to the Left since the very nature of being a worker in a society where it's somewhat optional says quite a bit in itself. Pretty much every worker accepts the validity of business, that it needs to be profitable, and pretty much everyone has investments at least via superannuation. Even the unions accept those points and impress them upon members - profit isn't a bad thing, indeed it's essential.

That being so, the "Left" in 2023 aren't those on the tools or sitting in office cubicles, rather it's those who either don't work or who don't need to work. That is, those on welfare and those with wealth, that's who the Left represents today. Versus historically when it represented anyone who wasn't particularly wealthy, including workers especially but not limited to blue collar.

That reality is what's behind most frustration with modern politics and the associated media. The reality that for mainstream Australia, those who work, aspire to work or who've retired with modest wealth, there's no serious party that represents them. On one hand it's religion, incompetence and general vitriol. On the other hand it's a choice of parties all of whom primarily represent those with wealth or those on welfare, neglecting the majority of the population somewhere in the middle.

This situation isn't unique to Australia but applies to most of the West. This sums it up well enough:

 

Similar threads

R
New York Times GOLD article
Replies
3
Views
9K
Mofra
Mofra
Top