The future of the ABC - Guthrie sacked

[madmug]

How are the toll roads going? Democracy?

How about Abbotts threat to withhold the $3bill for road infrastructure if the Vics vote for Labour on saturday. Is that part of the 'democratic' process under PM Abbort?

 

[smokingjacket]

Turnbull as maditted masmuch because it's not politicallly feasible to completely shut down the ABC. Congratulations on being on the side that is immune to democracy.

Que? The ABC is more popular than the Liberal Party could ever hope to be. The first line is just rubbish too. Why would you shut it down? You'd sell it surely? He's said that the networks are terrified of even little SBS being privatised.

 

[Maggie5]

Que? The ABC is more popular than the Liberal Party could ever hope to be. The first line is just rubbish too. Why would you shut it down? You'd sell it surely? He's said that the networks are terrified of even little SBS being privatised.

Agree, SBS are already competing with the networks given they are allowed more time for ads.
Perhaps if the networks didn't pay their presenters so much and had better quality programs instead of reality rubbish, people may switch to their channels.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2014/s4134884.htm

Listen to that. Mark Scott said 4 million people PER WEEK watch ABC News 24. I think if anyone would know the stats of who watch it, it would be him. Once again, you're wrong.

I wake up to News Breakfast every morning, gives me the news I need, a bit of sport, a bit of weather, a bit of government and politics, a bit of general news. It's much better than the offerings on 7 & 9 especially the presenters, banter and quality of content.

 

[Xsess]

Secondly. What facts are you referring to? The link you posted was anecdotal...

Are you incapable of rational debate? Tell me the flaw in this analysis which clearly demonstrates left wing bia on the Insiders program, based upon the left leaning composition of panelists. For example, if you disagree with the authors method of allocating the political leanings of the panelists - lets have it. Where is it wrong?

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2014/04/2...inct-bias-on-abc-insiders-do-the-numbers-lie/

 

[Gough]

I might as well find an article from the Green Left Weekly to prove that the ABC is a fantastic product to counter something from that particular website, it would be about as impartial. That article also imposes the authors judgement on what constitutes, left, right and neutral so can be considered an opinion piece as opposed to hard fact.

 

[Xsess]

I might as well find an article from the Green Left Weekly to prove that the ABC is a fantastic product to counter something from that particular website, it would be about as impartial. That article also imposes the authors judgement on what constitutes, left, right and neutral so can be considered an opinion piece as opposed to hard fact.

Give me one example where in your subective view a panelist has been unfairly described as "left leaning" by the author?

 

[scon]

ABC retains Communists on huge salaries.
#Catallazyfiles maditted masmuch.

 

[Gough]

Give me one example where in your subective view a panelist has been unfairly described as "left leaning" by the author?

I'll give you five, Lenore Taylor, Annabel Crabb, George Megalogenis and Fran Kelly described as hard left, and Chris Uhlmann described as left. The first four, as good journalists do, give no indication of how they vote, and Uhlmann is a social conservative.
Edit - Not describing Henderson as far right, a five using his model would also fudge the figures, if he considers the names I have mentioned to be hard left and doesn't consider Henderson similairly for the other side, then I think we can safely class this as opinion and not fact.

 

[Xsess]

I'll give you five, Lenore Taylor, Annabel Crabb, George Megalogenis and Fran Kelly described as hard left, and Chris Uhlmann described as left. The first four, as good journalists do, give no indication of how they vote, and Uhlmann is a social conservative.

Ok good, and because I'm a generous dude feel free to move the the first four one step to the right then, from hard left to simply left. If you want, you can even class Uhlmann as righty (!lol!)...

Think that still puts the left leaning panelists at more than 75%

And thats just one show

 

[scon]

For some opinion masquerading as fact is more than enough.
Some seem to prefer it in fact;that's my opinion.

 

[Lester Burnham]

They need to be doing both to be an effective news organisation and look after the rural areas.

If you ask the ABC to behave like a private company and apply market pressures to it, the ABC will cut the things that get the least bang for buck like rural broadcasting. Cutting the ABC's budget because every other news organistaion has had to cut theirs is not a way to maintain rural programming.

It should be funded properly and generously for the good of all Australian's. If you don't enjoy the politics of some shows then write in and complain, it is a public broadcaster. You don't slash the budget of the one quality Australian news source we have.

The ABC is not being asked to behave like a private company. They have had a small budget cut and are being asked to run more efficiently. It is Scott's choice to cut back on cut back on regional services and expand digital. It is also his choice that when faced with a paltry $20 million cut in the ABC's budget in 2015-16 he immediately sacks 10% of the staff.

I'm happy with ABC news but why have The Drum when there are plenty of other opinion providers that have to find non-taxpayer funding to survive? Or bloggers that do it for nothing. What does the ABC sport website provide that you can't get elsewhere? Why have an ABC Environment website when the Greens website will give you the same information.

I would like to see the ABC funded properly and generously but I would also like to see them properly represent all Australians. It would pointless writing to them when the current directors disregard their role in ensuring the ABC adheres to its charter

to provide broadcasting programs that contribute to a sense of national identity and inform and entertain, and reflect the cultural diversity of, the Australian community.​

 

[Xsess]

The government and most Australian's thankfully don't believe that people who live in rural and remote areas should be left with out the level of information necessary to form political views and participate in democracy.

So why is Mark Scott is winding these regional services back?

Why is Mark Scott persuing a centralisation agenda into Melbourne and Sydney?

 

[Xsess]

In keeping with the ABC ideology, to cover these cost cuts why dont those earning over $200k+ take a 65% pay cut, the next lower tier ($100k) 33%, and those over eighty thousand a 10% cut, to cover those about to lose their jobs? That way it brings everyone closer to their socialist utopia, of everyone being poorer for the common good. And everyone having a job, even though there is no real use for the job they have. Lol

 

[Bosun]

How about Abbotts threat to withhold the $3bill for road infrastructure if the Vics vote for Labour on saturday. Is that part of the 'democratic' process under PM Abbort?

He won't withhold it of Labor win, he'll withold it if they scrap the east west link, which I do not think they will follow through with.

 

[romeoh]

Ok good, and because I'm a generous dude feel free to move the the first four one step to the right then, from hard left to simply left. If you want, you can even class Uhlmann as righty (!lol!)...

Think that still puts the left leaning panelists at more than 75%

And thats just one show

How do you have any idea whatsoever what the political leanings of Fran Kelly are ? I have never heard her be anything other than fair on both sides. I listen to her every day and can't fathom how you can say that so what exactly are you basing it on?

 

[Maggie5]

The ABC is not being asked to behave like a private company. They have had a small budget cut and are being asked to run more efficiently. It is Scott's choice to cut back on cut back on regional services and expand digital. It is also his choice that when faced with a paltry $20 million cut in the ABC's budget in 2015-16 he immediately sacks 10% of the staff.

I'm happy with ABC news but why have The Drum when there are plenty of other opinion providers that have to find non-taxpayer funding to survive? Or bloggers that do it for nothing. What does the ABC sport website provide that you can't get elsewhere? Why have an ABC Environment website when the Greens website will give you the same information.

I would like to see the ABC funded properly and generously but I would also like to see them properly represent all Australians. It would pointless writing to them when the current directors disregard their role in ensuring the ABC adheres to its charter

to provide broadcasting programs that contribute to a sense of national identity and inform and entertain, and reflect the cultural diversity of, the Australian community.​

I tend to agree with you on 'The Drum' but I see what you have done by pointing out that the Environment/Greens website are the same (cheeky).
Also note your bold, does not state 'all Australians', doubt that any organisation can do that. I think that they do a pretty good job and perhaps they needed fine tuning.
The biggest problem for me are not the cuts but another broken promise.

 

[Danny Cullen]

The biggest problem for me are not the cuts but another broken promise.

I doubt very much that you would have voted for Mr Abbott based on that 'promise' on election eve.

People more likely would have voted for Ms Gillard based on her 'no carbon tax under a government i lead' promise.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Gough]

It shows what a dumb politician Abbott is and how he's incapable of learning from history. He was going to romp it in yet still he had to open his mouth, and it's clear he hasn't learnt from the Rudd experience either. Rudd promised to be Howard lite, and looked how that worked out for him, Abbott and his no cuts to ABC, SBS, health, education, pension, etc, he was just trying to put the minds of the voter at ease by promising to maintain the popular ALP policies, because if he'd revealed his real agenda he would have been unelectable.

 

[Maggie5]

I doubt very much that you would have voted for Mr Abbott based on that 'promise' on election eve.

People more likely would have voted for Ms Gillard based on her 'no carbon tax under a government i lead' promise.

Apples and oranges.

"Another broken promise" is what I wrote, not just one and you are right, it wouldn't have influenced me if it was only one.
However as I have posted on more than one occasion, it is not the pre-election promise of no cuts, he repeated the promise again in February this year.
Which only goes to show either he has a bad memory or a liar, which doesn't go well if you are the PM.

 

[Danny Cullen]

"Another broken promise" is what I wrote, not just one and you are right, it wouldn't have influenced me if it was only one.

You're missing the point. You wouldn't have voted for Mr Abbott anyway.

Bitching and moaning now about what the government is trying to achieve, taking into account broken promises, should be the domain of those who voted for the Coalition.

All the rest is just Abbott bashing because you can.

 

[Gough]

You're missing the point. You wouldn't have voted for Mr Abbott anyway.

Bitching and moaning now about what the government is trying to achieve, taking into account broken promises, should be the domain of those who voted for the Coalition.

All the rest is just Abbott bashing because you can.

So all those who hounded Gillard but didn't vote for her had no right to either, is that what you're saying?

 

[romeoh]

You're missing the point. You wouldn't have voted for Mr Abbott anyway.

Bitching and moaning now about what the government is trying to achieve, taking into account broken promises, should be the domain of those who voted for the Coalition.

All the rest is just Abbott bashing because you can.

Not sure I get you-so if you didn't vote for them, you don't get to assess their performance. Is that it?

 

[Danny Cullen]

So all those who hounded Gillard but didn't vote for her had no right to either, is that what you're saying?

Pretty much, though her broken promise (because of cosying up to the Greens) had a far greter impact than (in the context of this thread) than some arts program on RN at 3pm that no-one listens to being given the flick.

 

[Danny Cullen]

I would also say that most of those who voted for Gillard would have wanted a carbon tax anyway. Just as most of those who voted for Abbott agree with cuts (as minimal as they are) to the ABC.