The future of the ABC - Guthrie sacked
- Thread starter Footy Smarts
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
And for everyone who wonders what the link says, Telsor's numbers were a bit out of date and it does indeed include crew and backroom staff within the general list. The 7 people under ABC's "TV Crew" are solely the camera crew (presumably because they get special access to go where the journos go, while most crew would not), while in the general list there are Production, IT, Graphics people and staff mgmt, etc. (I only checked 15% of them against Twitter/LinkedIn/etc.)
Additionally it appears Telsor didn't include Sky, presumably because it is only part-owned by News Corp, but you'd think some reference to it would have been warranted since it is the TV side of News Corp and TV requires larger staff. The numbers for Sky also don't include AV staff for outside their studio, so you really should include those freelance members to make it a direct comparison, but anyway:
- ABC: 59 members
- News Corp: 34 members
- Sky News: 10 members (making 44 members in total, excluding freelance crew for outside the studio)
- There are also two other News Corp associated members (one Wall Street Journal, one the Sky News NZ correspondant) but we'll ignore them due to their int'l audience.
I get why people with weak arguments would resort to lying, but for you to lie to benefit your wish that a specific style of show was on at a specific time when you wanted it to be an din a child-friendly fashion despite the late hour...? Bottom of the barrel, stuff, Xsess. And if you find ABC too complex for you despite the lack of detail on a show like Q&A or in the very amateur-friendly science on Catalyst, please don't hide behind your kids with your excuses.
Last edited:
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
When do we hear the result of the "independent" audit of Q&A by the ABCs appointee Ray Martin? I look forward to the ABC being nailed for its right wing bias and to Tony Abbot'ts reaction to the recommendation for the ABC''s budget to be increased by 50%.
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
I scanned all four channels but sadly, its like Australian natural biota doesn't exist and science is limited to climate change, the only issues that matter occur within the Sydney city limits and in the ocean between Australia and Indonesia
Last edited:
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
Further proof that Xsess isn't a human.
I scanned all four channels but sadly, its like Australian natural biota doesn't exist and science is limited to climate change, the only issues that matter occur within the Sydney city limits and in the ocean between Australia and Indonesia
Well thats more Australiana stuff than the BBC gives us!
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
Has Ray released his "independent" report yet, or its still with the board getting peer reviewed..?
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
I noticed you didn't post in that thread, but I am genuinely interested if you think there were policies that were genuinely better from the LNP. The major narrative at the time as I'm sure you would recall was that of 'debt and deficit' yet any informed look at the LNP policies showed they were spending more $.
News says Australia is going through the sharpest rise in national debt in its history.
Well done by the adults in Gument. Now is the time for a 'captains pick' that actually works.
But I'd settle for some basic economic policy & direction
I'm on the record stating that the government has a spending problem. But that was not what I was talking about, which is why I didn't respond.
I was remarking on the tremendous ability of those who are left of centre to contend that when one becomes "informed" or "educated" that they will see the light and become left-wing themselves, and arguing also for the other side of that coin: one can only become right of centre if you are ill-informed, or not getting the whole picture, or just believing what those evil Murdochistas choose to feed you in the daily rag.
Pssssh.
I was remarking on the tremendous ability of those who are left of centre to contend that when one becomes "informed" or "educated" that they will see the light and become left-wing themselves, and arguing also for the other side of that coin: one can only become right of centre if you are ill-informed, or not getting the whole picture, or just believing what those evil Murdochistas choose to feed you in the daily rag.
Pssssh.
Gough
Moderator
- Sep 29, 2006
- 71,905
- 133,497
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Moderator
- #4,364
You guys all lapped up the whole debt, and deficit disaster s**t, and were certain that it was really, and truly the ALP's fault, and Tony Abbott, and the Liberal Party were going lead us back to the land of milk, and honey. You were sold a dud mate, stop bleating.
Baldy Head
Senior List
- Feb 11, 2015
- 233
- 76
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Banned
- #4,365
I started out as a Leftie, but as I grew up and got informed, I put childish things away, like my Leftie mindset.
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
Yep, you've obviously put your childish things away. That's why you have a Gary Ablett Jr avatar where he looks like he has a clown wig.
The idea of it being 'natural' for people to start left and go right, doesn't mean you keep going right. It means you go from feeling sympathy for all, to thinking that some people need to take more responsibility for themselves. All mainstream political parties have policy that agrees with that.
Huh? Your characterisation of the conversation is fictional. The spending comment was an adjunct to my second reply to you asking why you hadn't replied the first time. Yet you say that's the reason you didn't reply to the first comment? I even showed the previous elements of the conversation in that second comment so I think you are deliberately avoiding the question.
I specifically pointed out why I thought an informed approach, which journalists should have had at the time, would make people more likely to vote for Labor in 2013. Do you really need me to point out what 'informed' means here? As in looking at what the Liberals were actually proposing to do, rather than what their rhetoric was, and a 'best guess' of what the policy impacts would be. Here's the original comment you had a problem with, and I invite you for a third time to make the argument for the LNP policy suite in 2012-13 if you disagree that policy would not have skewed the numbers in that period:
Well, here's the thing. Your contention about journalists being informed and then the "policy-free zone" stuff is a little (but only a little) like that piece in Fairfax yesterday about legislation - you can choose any metric to prove your point.
I would suggest that the ALP could have provided 5 million policies in the lead-up to the 2013 election, and it would have proven pretty unhelpful. This is because voters were using a different metric which was almost certainly based on the past performance of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd Government. They had become convinced that no matter the policy depth, they couldn't trust the ALP to tie their own shoe laces let alone run a country. It didn't matter what either side promised. If voters see things one way, then why should journos see things differently? Oh wait, they should be better informed.
Now, after two years of the Abbott Coalition Government, I am disappointed. They haven't persisted with policy implementation and have also shown an ability to get the politics wrong. But considering except for four effective years between 1983 and 1987, the ALP has never (in my estimation) produced a quality Federal Government in this country. There have been good moments, but they have been too few.
Now, someone who doesn't see the world the way I do will come on here and call me ill-informed. I've had this discussion with many on here, including you. We. just. disagree. Some are on here to change minds and hearts - I'm not. If you prefer "discussing" things with others on here like Xsess then don't change a thing. All that will be left will be people speaking to brick walls.
I would suggest that the ALP could have provided 5 million policies in the lead-up to the 2013 election, and it would have proven pretty unhelpful. This is because voters were using a different metric which was almost certainly based on the past performance of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd Government. They had become convinced that no matter the policy depth, they couldn't trust the ALP to tie their own shoe laces let alone run a country. It didn't matter what either side promised. If voters see things one way, then why should journos see things differently? Oh wait, they should be better informed.
Now, after two years of the Abbott Coalition Government, I am disappointed. They haven't persisted with policy implementation and have also shown an ability to get the politics wrong. But considering except for four effective years between 1983 and 1987, the ALP has never (in my estimation) produced a quality Federal Government in this country. There have been good moments, but they have been too few.
Now, someone who doesn't see the world the way I do will come on here and call me ill-informed. I've had this discussion with many on here, including you. We. just. disagree. Some are on here to change minds and hearts - I'm not. If you prefer "discussing" things with others on here like Xsess then don't change a thing. All that will be left will be people speaking to brick walls.
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
It definately was the ALP's fault. And blocking savings meaures in budget #1 means it still is. But now there's no record term so trade to pull us out the s**t so our economy goes from bad to worse and Abbott - the monumental ass- has shrunk from the fight in order to save his own political arse.
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
That's true, but the flip side of 'lies and statistics' is that many statistics are very, very useful. At it's bare bones this one doesn't necessarily mean much, but when you see how every other Govt from 1971 onwards has passed markedly more legislation, it suggests something has gone majorly wrong. When you put it against the rhetoric of the Coalition - 'dysfunction', 'disaster', 'doom', etc. - then you'd think they'd have had more to do than others.
Because it's journos' jobs to know what is going on, whereas regular voters have jobs that get in the road of finding out what is really going on because they're busy and don't want to look at policy detail at the end of the day. And for the record, I value the quality of policies over the quantity. The Liberals provided no detail to their policies, and when forced to provide detail, their numbers were dodgy. That's what I meant by "relatively policy-free".
The only way to come to that conclusion is to hold one side to a different set of rules and expectations than the other.
Being ill-informed and being biased are different things. You present as someone willing to look at what has actually happened, in which case I'd think you would be informed and would be open to hearing information if you didn't know about something. Like I am. Obviously if you think Labor has "never produced a quality Federal Government in this country" you are biased. That's shown somewhat in the fact you have an exception to your own rule, so "never" would seem to be a word you've used simply for political effect - in the same way I said "relatively policy-free". However, I applied that political phrase to a specific Abbott govt, not to describe the Coalition as a whole over decades, and I think it's relatively justified, which is why I'm following up on this point. Talking to Xsess is 95% of the time talking to a brick wall, so whatever that last paragraph means, I wouldn't have applied that to you. I'm curious as to your position on the Liberals policies pre-election, so if you want to give it in that thread, that'd be interesting and informative.
I pointed to four years where there was quality.
1949-1972
1975-1983
1996-2007
Please indicate the quality years in those I have listed above or be damned by your own metric that you alone introduced.
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
What? You've cut down my quote to deliberately remove me referring to where you gave the exception. Why?
As in you want me to specifically say which years were good and which were bad for years when I was a child or not alive, on the basis of a metric you claim I "alone introduced", yet you fail to quote so that I have any idea about what you're talking about? I think you're trying to say that I think no Coalition govt is quality, but I specifically said I only said that the Abbott govt was relatively policy-free. That's also obvious in the way I refer constantly on BF to "5 years" or "6 years" when pointing to the Abbott years.
As I said, you have presented as someone willing to actually look at detail and not be one-eyed, so I don't get why this specific question has caused you to become so belligerent. I'm not having a go. You attacked my use of "informed" and I attempted to justify it.
1949 - 72. The sleepy years. We just floated along. Buoyed by immigration. Waltzed into the Vietnam war debacle. We hid behind a fixed currency & for much of it failed to develop much industry policy.
1975-83 Frazer. recognised for lost opportunity. Had decent majorities & did very little with them.
1996-2007. The easiest period of Gument ever. We floated along on the world boom & the China phenomenon. Hard to not look good. Despite this Howard set us up for the structural budget deficits to come.
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
And what they call the babies born durng the 50's and early 60's, those sleepy times when nothing hapenned?
Ratts of Tobruk
Cancelled
- May 1, 2013
- 9,168
- 5,975
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- ATV Irdning
Hahaha - I think Xsess thought the Baby Boomers were called that because it was 'boom' times...
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
Yep both in population growth and the rise of industry.
