The future of the ABC - Guthrie sacked

Remove this Banner Ad

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
"plenty" is a stretch. i agree that sky has some quality content though.

Sky is not the only news/current affairs channel on Pay TV in Australia. There are actually quite a lot, and together they provide a lot more content than the ABC, at zero cost to taxpayers.
 
You obviously didn't read my post at all.
Yes, I did and responded to it.

If you're implying that the last part of your comment:
You've already got services like Imparja and GWN/WIN that fulfill a similar role in regional areas using content from private creators.
Iis missed, it is not - ABC do actually utilize this model in some areas and for some programs. They also operate combined "hubs" which allow locals to create their own content for use by multiple media (by this I mean TV, broadcasting and on-demand online content).
 

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
Iis missed, it is not - ABC do actually utilize this model in some areas and for some programs. They also operate combined "hubs" which allow locals to create their own content for use by multiple media (by this I mean TV, broadcasting and on-demand online content).

Sure, they have always done so. But the majority of ABC content is created by the ABC.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Stumpy Pete

Premiership Player
Sep 2, 2003
3,100
2,120
At the Butterfly Ball
AFL Club
Collingwood
Do you mean vastly different in terms of biased content, or in terms of the 24hr news cycle they have taken up?

Vastly different in terms of format and content. I think the ABCs increasing foray in to News, Current Affairs and opinion based reporting has not been useful to the organisation. This is particularly the case for an organisation that is publicly funded (hence far less sensitive to ratings/sponsors) and which has displayed an attitude that so long as it plays to its existing audience it should not be held to account for its content.* My problem with the ABC is that too often it seems to act in a manner that suggests that the broadcaster thinks it needs to fill a gap in the conversation rather than having a balance of content that appeals to everyone across the community/political spectrum.

* Just on this bit- this refers to the ABCs internal decision regrding the Chris Kenny Chaser skit where the ABC internal processes found that even though the content was offensive because the content was "one very familiar to its target audience”. This ruling did nothing to quell criticism that the ABC, which we all pay for, simplys panders to its core audience. The ruling also made hypocrits out of every ABC journo/panelist who criticised Alan Jones for his "died of shame" comment. Arguably had Alan Jones made this terribly offensive comment on an ABC show where it was clear that the target audience where anti-Labor zealots then the ABC internal processes would have dismissed Jones' comments as being something that the show's audience would expect and not take offence to. But instead Jones made his comments at a private Young Liberals function (as opposed to the Chaser who broadcast publically and nationally) and we had ABC journos and panelists going in hard against Jones. So what's my point here - my point is that in its rush to get into the News/Current Affair/Opinion world of content it has not sufficiently examined the protocols and bahaviours for other parts of its organisation to ensure that values and opinions are consistent across all of its employees/content.


Regards

S. Pete
 
Sure, they have always done so. But the majority of ABC content is created by the ABC.
That is true, fair point.

The argument against the ABC is still predicated on two basic premises though -
1 is the "bias" argument (and regular ACMA investigations debunk this argument)
2 is the publically funded argument, of which countering requires a discussion of multiple facets of what the ABC provides via multiple sources.
Being publically funded and either creating or buying content still leaves the crux of the argument (publically funded) untouched.

Having (for my sins) read regional TV reports based on both content and the economics of the industry, I remain convinced that the ABC provide a vital service in Australia - especially considering the decline in programming standards that commercial TV appear to be engaging in as they cut costs due to ongoing reductions in TV revenue.
 

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
That is true, fair point.

The argument against the ABC is still predicated on two basic premises though -
1 is the "bias" argument (and regular ACMA investigations debunk this argument)
2 is the publically funded argument, of which countering requires a discussion of multiple facets of what the ABC provides via multiple sources.
Being publically funded and either creating or buying content still leaves the crux of the argument (publically funded) untouched.

The 2 arguments are inextricably linked IMO.

It doesn't matter how biased the ABC is if it isn't publicly funded. Being publicly funded is the issue.

But in that sense I am talking about the content creation. Having the signal broadcast publicly funded is no issue as long as the content provision is run by a transparent tender process (and not vetoed by the government on ideological grounds, as Gillard did with the Australia Network).
 

Long Live HFC

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 30, 2010
5,545
4,363
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Sky is not the only news/current affairs channel on Pay TV in Australia. There are actually quite a lot, and together they provide a lot more content than the ABC, at zero cost to taxpayers.

admittedly it's been several years since i had pay tv, but asides from the apolitical business shows, the rest tend to be at the s**t end of the quality spectrum.
 

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
Having (for my sins) read regional TV reports based on both content and the economics of the industry, I remain convinced that the ABC provide a vital service in Australia - especially considering the decline in programming standards that commercial TV appear to be engaging in as they cut costs due to ongoing reductions in TV revenue.

I grew up in regional Australia so I understand the importance that the ABC used to have there.

In truth now, everyone has access to satellite pay TV so nobody cares, except very old people.
 
The 2 arguments are inextricably linked IMO.

It doesn't matter how biased the ABC is if it isn't publicly funded. Being publicly funded is the issue.

But in that sense I am talking about the content creation. Having the signal broadcast publicly funded is no issue as long as the content provision is run by a transparent tender process (and not vetoed by the government on ideological grounds, as Gillard did with the Australia Network).
As it stands, the majority of content creation (as I understand it) is run on a combination of "market gaps model" (which the board often deny) and from pitches to the ABC that have a number of requirements to be met.

I do believe there are a number of vital services the ABC provide (and find their programming largely of much higher quality than commercial broadcasters) but can understand the argument for greater transparency on how they select their broadcasting. The other concern is that by aligning their process more with commercial broadcasting requirements (especially if there are any 'commercial justification' interests built in) it would serve to reduce quality closer to commercial broadcasting world, and one of the better points of the ABC is their ability to broadcast quality without the same commercial constraints (hence a lack of reality TV on the ABC).

I grew up in regional Australia so I understand the importance that the ABC used to have there.

In truth now, everyone has access to satellite pay TV so nobody cares, except very old people.
The regional news report indicates the elderly prefer print media for their news, radio second - other generations prefer TV or internet.

Nationals will never let this happen.
True - independent senators either (hi Nick Xenophon)
 

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
Nationals will never let this happen.

They won't let it happen as long as their primary demographic loves the ABC, and that's why the ABC still has bipartisan support in Australia.

Never is a long time though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

pokerspiv

Premiership Player
Jun 23, 2013
4,714
2,713
AFL Club
Fremantle
I do believe there are a number of vital services the ABC provide (and find their programming largely of much higher quality than commercial broadcasters) but can understand the argument for greater transparency on how they select their broadcasting. The other concern is that by aligning their process more with commercial broadcasting requirements (especially if there are any 'commercial justification' interests built in) it would serve to reduce quality closer to commercial broadcasting world, and one of the better points of the ABC is their ability to broadcast quality without the same commercial constraints (hence a lack of reality TV on the ABC).

I think it's important to differentiate between free-to-air commerical stations and subscription TV. The former have to cater to the lowest common denominator and I agree that model wouldn't work for the ABC. But subscription TV has proven to be a viable method of delivering high quality news, current affairs and documentary content, and there's no reason to believe that the ABC couldn't exist under such a model. The major obstacle is trying to convince people to pay for something that they have historically got for "free".

Radio is a different story since you can't charge people for a subscription radio service.
 

mottrain

Premiership Player
Suspended
Apr 21, 2014
3,826
1,703
AFL Club
Geelong
OK, I believe that homosexuals have the right to marry.
You believe that homosexuals are the same as paedophiles.

I don't think I'm the one who is on the horizon.


That's why you view the ABC as incredibly biased to the left. You think that you are centre-right.
No I don't. I believe that the mental defect or whatever you want to name it that makes them attracted to men if they are a man for example is the same as the thing that makes children attractive to pedops. This is blatantly backed up by medical/scientific research. They are not the same as one is attracted to children and one is attracted to adults etc and also one only refers to attraction to the same sex on its own.
 

Long Live HFC

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 30, 2010
5,545
4,363
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No I don't. I believe that the mental defect or whatever you want to name it that makes them attracted to men if they are a man for example is the same as the thing that makes children attractive to pedops. This is blatantly backed up by medical/scientific research. They are not the same as one is attracted to children and one is attracted to adults etc and also one only refers to attraction to the same sex on its own.

cite?
 

Floor Pie

Cancelled
May 13, 2014
2,580
2,404
AFL Club
St Kilda
No I don't. I believe that the mental defect or whatever you want to name it that makes them attracted to men if they are a man for example is the same as the thing that makes children attractive to pedops. This is blatantly backed up by medical/scientific research. They are not the same as one is attracted to children and one is attracted to adults etc and also one only refers to attraction to the same sex on its own.
I think you've saved me digging up a quote of yours...

Homosexuality is a mental defect, and is the same thing that causes paedophilia...
 

mottrain

Premiership Player
Suspended
Apr 21, 2014
3,826
1,703
AFL Club
Geelong
Former versions of the DSM and also many psychiatrists even the current DSM has made comments on how the two should be treated through society for their totally different characteristics.
I think you've saved me digging up a quote of yours...

Homosexuality is a mental defect, and is the same thing that causes paedophilia...
It is. The area of the brain which controls attraction doesn't function with the majority norm and digresses in different ways. Doesn't mean they are the same thing nor have I said in that above comment they are the same.
 

Long Live HFC

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 30, 2010
5,545
4,363
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Former versions of the DSM and also many psychiatrists even the current DSM has made comments on how the two should be treated through society for their totally different characteristics.

and current versions of the DSM do not list homosexuality as a disease or condition of any kind. do you have anything else in the way of published literature that claims that the same/similar "mental defect" exists to explain both homosexuality and paedophilia?
 

mottrain

Premiership Player
Suspended
Apr 21, 2014
3,826
1,703
AFL Club
Geelong
and current versions of the DSM do not list homosexuality as a disease or condition of any kind. do you have anything else in the way of published literature that claims that the same/similar "mental defect" exists to explain both homosexuality and paedophilia?
Many current psychiatrists disagree too with the DSM. As for that section I have had it clarified by a psych that said if a homosexual was going after straight guys persistently it would fall under the definition linked in the article thus making that form of homosexuality a mental disease.
 

Floor Pie

Cancelled
May 13, 2014
2,580
2,404
AFL Club
St Kilda
Many current psychiatrists disagree too with the DSM. As for that section I have had it clarified by a psych that said if a homosexual was going after straight guys persistently it would fall under the definition linked in the article thus making that form of homosexuality a mental disease.
Stop making s**t up...
 

mottrain

Premiership Player
Suspended
Apr 21, 2014
3,826
1,703
AFL Club
Geelong
I think you posted the wrong link...

Unless you're trying to say the following relates to homosexuality...;
...

The ABC must seem like a different world to you...
Even Andrew Bolt must seem like a looney leftist...
Yes it can it would include when straight guys are persistently harrassed by homosexuals and they are not interested in them.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back