Our Abc

[Guest]

Well what do you know?

Our own invisible Mark Scott, our illustrious leader of the poor and downtrodden of our society, and of the lowest paid of his kingdom, has shown his true colours.

In true capitalist fashion has come out of hiding and slashed the knees of his plebs and left the fat cats captains in peace.

He made the choice, fat cats or plebs.

Plebs or crappy so called comics/comedy.

I can see Abbott this morning talking to his team: "God guys, that's our job to crucify the poor!"

Oh Scotty said he loves his staff and will do anything for them. Yeah right!

[Aloysius]

Our ALP oops ABC!!!!

 

 

Despite leading a campaign of unsourced and unsubstantiated leadership claims about Abbott they have merely advertised their political bias.

 

One hopes that the abrogation of their duty of impartial reporting is noted increasingly by the electorate.

 

Frankly, a more direct response to their bias is long overdue.

 

 

The ABC is in a position of significant political influence, to cheapen this position by blatant bias is basically defacating on a public trust.

 

To confirm the above claims observe the number of leadership based ABC reports on  government leadership  over the next few weeks decline.

[POWERZONE]

Rofl! Leadership claims about Abbott have been on just about every commercial TV network, newspaper and website to the point that I'm actually getting rather bored with it. Doesn't seem to stop Coalition members from talking to ABC jouno's though???

 

Abrogation of duty is all media outlets blatantly ignoring the laws of impartiality.

[Aloysius]

PZ the difference I see is that the ABC is taxpayer funded and that it has a duty to be factual and present news - not to attempt to mold public opinion by reportng opinion - biased opinion - as news.

 

I expect no better from the commercial folks they are in it for the bucks, but the ABC is not - apart from ritual screaming if funding is diminished.

 

I do share your boredom with this but I also am pretty damned disappointed with the standards.

 

It's Toosdie!

[POWERZONE]

Taxpayer funding should have no bearing on content. It's a bit like questioning the funding for Australia Post because it doesn't sell copies of "Battlelines".

 

The sole purpose of the funding is to provide public broadcasting... period.

 

The content of the broadcasts are regulated by the ABC act of 1983 which clearly states its editorial independence. In other words, they can broadcast whatever they want. If Governments don't like it they need to alter the act, not threaten to cut its funding as it's irrelevant to the issue.

 

As we have a "budget emergency" I'd be more inclined to review the structure of the operation, particularly in the area of executives salaries; currently Mark Scott earns $770k a year - much more than the Prime Minister.. not bad for a public servant, and there's plenty of them.

 

The other area is the number of radio stations that are broadcasting content that no one listens to. Country Victoria has about 5 stations for every 2 commercial services. Parliament newsradio scores precisely zip in most of those areas. It's expensive to operate and it's a waste of valuable spectrum that could easily be solved by consolidation.

 

Bandwidth spectrum is an inexhaustible resource that generates billions per year of revenue.

 

In a country as vast as Australia it's a no brainer that maximising this resource should have higher priority over dictating on air content.

 

IMO

[Aloysius]

Well guess what: publically funded should mean unbiased reporting and comment.

 

Give the roughly 50 / 5o ALP LNP split one might on a good day expect a similar split in the political background of commentators and opinion presenters - that is not the case.

 

That being the case the idea of editorial independence seems to be on a very rough road.

 

To equate budget cuts with attacks on editorial independence is a furphy.

 

 

I do however applaud your questioning of the salaries of incompetent managers it's a sad joke that this CEO get's rewarded more highly than the PM whether that be Rudd, Gillard, Rudd or Abbott!

[POWERZONE]

Well there are two ways you can have unbiased reporting and comment.

 

You can have the Government in question avoid unwanted scrutiny, which means they start performing better for the country and if they can't manage that, they simply stop Coalition pollies from supplying info, or talking to, the ABC.

 

Or you can change the act, enforce 50/50 equal propaganda on air, which means you bring in a communist Govt.

 

I don't see either of these two events happening so... let's have an early election :officechair:

[POWERZONE]

It's charter is editorial independence. We could ask the Govt to remove the independence if you like?

 

Yes, I do agree our Liberal leaders are too gufcink weak..... maybe that's half the problem?

 

Every time they stuff up they end up in the news, including the ABC. Anything less would not be up to date reporting.

 

Here's an interesting fact. Since 2007, 19 ex ABC employees joined political parties, 10 to ALP, 9 to LNP

 

Tony Abbott spent 3 years calling for an early election every time a promise was broken, since then he's broken 13 promises in a year and a half.... so I agree, it's a good idea, let's do it, let's stop the pontificating, willful procrastination and naval gazing and get this country back on track.

 

Happy confident voters will spend money, currently they're not.

[POWERZONE]

The other half must be happy then

 

9 out of 46 dissidents... that's what you're saying, right?

[POWERZONE]

46 Liberal members wanted Toxic Tony to do the right thing and exit stage left <<<<

ports:

[POWERZONE]

Hi Power.

I think 9 out of 19 leaving the Labor recruitment machine and becoming Liberals is a good result!

So do I. Because it discredits the claims of the ABC being some Labor recruitment machine in the first place.

 

What about the 46?
Could not find a knife between them!
Should have rung Shorty! he has two!

Maybe they should join the other side, yeah?

Come to think of it, Tony Abbott should just leave the Liberal Party and just run as an independent.

Doesn't seem to have many friends in any places!

When he loses maybe he could apply for Mark Scott's job? It's abundantly clear he's only in it for the money anyway.

[Aloysius]

Abbott's leadership woes generated by rumour and innuendo and served up by a biased and self interested media are over.

 

The LNP will win any election next be it DD or not - rest easy those other folks are not coming back.

 

One expects a further erosion of Green voting support, the probable end of the Palmer experiment - hey he may even stay out of jail!

 

All that is bad news for the ALp and it's mean mouthed little leader. 

 

Waddya reckon: the ABC to kick off a round of anti Shorten rumourmongering to demonstrate it's even handedness?

 

 

Cheap shots as to Abbott's motivation for serving as PM are not worthy of you PZ!

[POWERZONE]

Please don't tell me he's there for the betterment of the community

 

Maybe he's there for you, not for me.  At 47% polling he doesn't appear to be there for many others either.

 

He's there for the life long perks that come with the job, they all are, Shorten's no different.


Maybe the rest of the media should be falling into line with the laws of unbiased reporting. I don't care where the funding comes from; attempts by Murdoch owned press to influence elections is despicable at best...

 

Funding for the ABC comes directly from the taxpayer, funding for Murdoch garbage comes indirectly from the taxpayer via O/S tax havens. Ask Joe Hockey, he agrees.

 

To use the argument of funding to suggest only the ABC should be unbiased is a one sided biased comment in itself.

 

So IMO the ABC can fall in line when everyone has, until then it remains strictly one sided in favour of the Coalition.


It's bad for the country but if it must continue that way, which it will, it's best done with the Coalition in opposition

 

 'ave a good weekend!

[Aloysius]

Aaaaah but it seems being one sided to the benefit of the ALP is OK being onesided to the others is not OK

 

Me: I would far prefer even handed opinion and reporting.

 

See Ya Toosdie

[POWERZONE]

Thanks Aloy.  Toosdie it is...
 
So you're agreeing with me then? I too would prefer even handed opinion and reporting.
 
But as previously stated it has to come from all media outlets and by extension the criticism of failure needs to be equally even handed.
 
Can't criticise one and not the other if you want to be impartial.

[POWERZONE]

Hi Power.

Well I recon that the 9 from 19 got out because they saw no advancement for liberal minded people.
Naturally that's just a guess.
It certainly does not prove that the ABC was not, is not biased! Yikes that's a long bow!

I completely agree, who is making this suggestion? Not me.

I attributed the 9/19 ratio to suggest the ABC was not a "Labor recruitment machine", not that it was unbiased.


"Elbow" nese reminds me of Kim Beasley... good value, but not electable.

[Aloysius]

Hah good guys come second?

 

Wanna add Mr Turnbulls name?

 

 

But that's the point: we like nice guys but we know that they won't do what needs to be done.

 

Meanwhile the ABC flagship ALP supporting programme hosted by the ex ALP staffer (QA) continues to use left wing comedians to carry the ALp torch - it's getting very difficult to justify wasting time listening to the half smart BS that is presented as the premier current affairs peoples voice.

 

If the ABC is determined to make opinion making a joke - well that's just about what they are.

[POWERZONE]

You don't think Turnbull can do the job?

Who was on QA yesterday? Julie Bishop yeah?

[POWERZONE]

Any good?

[POWERZONE]

G,day Peter.

 

Yep I agree it sounds pretty crass.

 

Do you reckon G Greer and Julie Bishop had equal opportunity to air their views?

 

Or is QA really one sided in favour of Labor as asserted in previous posts?