Opinion Politics (warning, may contain political views you disagree with)

Remove this Banner Ad

For years the ABC every time it was analyzed came out as non biased. People tried for years to make out it’s left leaning but it’s not. It’s constantly judged as impartial.

At some point reporting the truth & holding power to account became considered left wing. It’s the least we should expect from any decent media source.

Since Abbot started banging on about team Australia and cutting funding, successive conservative governments have stacked the board with ex Murdoch schills. I mean it’s actually a policy at the IPA to privatize it & guess who will end up owning it? Murdoch.

The ABC these days is so terrified of losing more money they barely report anything of meaning or take on big issues. It’s just become toothless.
 
I think the only branch of ABC clearly indisputably left leaning is JJJ but that's their brand and audience. Listening to them try to appear neutral in any way is always good for a laugh. Rest seems pretty neutral to me.

Also, King Huskii has been banned from the thread for a week
 
E Shed said:
For years the ABC every time it was analyzed came out as non biased. People tried for years to make out it’s left leaning but it’s not. It’s constantly judged as impartial.

At some point reporting the truth & holding power to account became considered left wing. It’s the least we should expect from any decent media source.

Since Abbot started banging on about team Australia and cutting funding, successive conservative governments have stacked the board with ex Murdoch schills. I mean it’s actually a policy at the IPA to privatize it & guess who will end up owning it? Murdoch.

The ABC these days is so terrified of losing more money they barely report anything of meaning or take on big issues. It’s just become toothless.
Click to expand...
There is or has been obviously left leaning parts of the channel, for example The Drum lol.

In saying that the parts that actually matter on the ABC are very impartial, basic reporting, 7.30, Insiders.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

E Shed said:
For years the ABC every time it was analyzed came out as non biased. People tried for years to make out it’s left leaning but it’s not. It’s constantly judged as impartial.

At some point reporting the truth & holding power to account became considered left wing. It’s the least we should expect from any decent media source.

Since Abbot started banging on about team Australia and cutting funding, successive conservative governments have stacked the board with ex Murdoch schills. I mean it’s actually a policy at the IPA to privatize it & guess who will end up owning it? Murdoch.

The ABC these days is so terrified of losing more money they barely report anything of meaning or take on big issues. It’s just become toothless.
Click to expand...

Who does the judging? That is the most important question.

We know they have run with false stories that have been admitted and corrected by left wing massive publications in the states. The ABC has never corrected themself. Why?
 
Kram said:
There is or has been obviously left leaning parts of the channel, for example The Drum lol.

In saying that the parts that actually matter on the ABC are very impartial, basic reporting, 7.30, Insiders.
Click to expand...

There are extremely left leaning parts as you say. Then there are just the left leaning parts like 7:30 and insiders.

Tell me how many pro 'no' votes and articles were on the ABC?
 
Friends of mine (3 mates) have completed the sale of 6 rental properties in Victoria. Not one went to an investor who will rent the homes out. 2 went to first home buyers.

I a convinced that the challenge is not being taken seriously. In the meantime, increasing taxes rarely achieves its desired purposes.
 
In the midst of the madness that will be the US election and how that affects us... which is far to much sadly.

There is a great experiment underway in the previous failing socialist state of Argentina. Will it last? I have no idea. An axe has been taken to departments and bureaucracies. An economics professor is president. Fascinating to observe.
 
Just because David Speers came from Sky doesn't make him conservative.

I have attached an interest article on how the ABC are able to keep pushing "progressive views" from the questions interviewers ask to how they stack their panels with left wing panelists.

The Insiders under new broom David Speers (touted by the ABC for “his inimitable interview style and forensic analysis”) has three panellists each week and I logged all 62 editions from February 2020 to May 2021 to establish how wide was the gene pool.

The answer is, not very. Of the 186 panellists used, the ABC contributed 44, Guardian Australia (29), Age/Sydney Morning Herald (24), Australian Financial Review (16), West Australian and Herald Sun (12), Saturday Paper and Nikki Savva (8), The Australian, Channel 10 and News.com.au (7), Mark Kenny (6), Courier Mail, Seven News and Crikey! (2) and the Daily Telegraph (0).

Most favoured were Patricia Karvelas (ABC) with 11 appearances, David Crowe (SMH) and Katharine Murphy (Guardian) on 10, the AFR’s Phil Coorey (9) followed by Niki Savva, the Saturday Paper’s Karen Middleton and ABC’s Andrew Probyn (all 8). Assigning Niki Savva and Peter van Onselen was a problem – they have weekly columns in The Australian, but very much align with the ABC. To avoid controversy I treated Ms Savva as independent and van Onselen as Channel 10, after all he is their political editor.

News Corp supplied only 19 (10.2%) of journalists compared with 60 (32.3%) for non-News Corp papers, 44 (23.7%) from the ABC and 63 (33.9%) from online and other media establishments.

ABC Bias and the System Sustaining It - Quadrant Online

The ABC has well-known views and, almost as a point of honour, makes sure few, very few, of its guests are at odds with the world as observed from Ultimo and Southbank. How prevalent is this left-eyed monoculism? Read on for a head count of 'Insiders' guests and their leanings over the course of...
quadrant.org.au quadrant.org.au

The answer to my original question is there are no conservative presenters left down at the ABC. None.

There is a real reason that right wing Aussies dont watch the ABC anymore. Left wingers love it and will go in to bat in defense of the accusation of left wing bias in order to maintain the predominate lefty narratives that exist in that organization.

This is now an abuse of taxpayer money and something needs to be done about it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kram said:
There is or has been obviously left leaning parts of the channel, for example The Drum lol.

In saying that the parts that actually matter on the ABC are very impartial, basic reporting, 7.30, Insiders.
Click to expand...
Insiders has been quite the asset given the reactions it generates from Twitter every Sunday without fail.
 
When it comes to the ABC as I have said before in this thread I think people misunderstand what a public broadcaster is for, it really is there to fill in the gaps of what mainstream commercial media won't cover.
Those gaps can be based on geography and population density (ABC rural), high art esoterica (ABC classical) or minority marginalised groups (LGBT, indigenous etc). It does give disproportionate coverage to all these issues, only the latter seems to really stir people up and lead to accusations of bias but it's all just part of being a public broadcaster.
 
The Feeder Club said:
When it comes to the ABC as I have said before in this thread I think people misunderstand what a public broadcaster is for, it really is there to fill in the gaps of what mainstream commercial media won't cover.
Those gaps can be based on geography and population density (ABC rural), high art esoterica (ABC classical) or minority marginalised groups (LGBT, indigenous etc). It does give disproportionate coverage to all these issues, only the latter seems to really stir people up and lead to accusations of bias but it's all just part of being a public broadcaster.
Click to expand...

It was designed to provide news and services to all of australia, rural and metro areas. It was never meant to run agendas for certain groups. While claiming to be journalists they push only one side of the agenda.

Name a position that would be considered a Liberal position that they take... I will wait.

While they are meant to provide a news service they now push agendas. And they are then quoted as an unbiased source.

As they have moved from the main goal of a public broadcaster I hope for the day they go the way of NPR in the states and lose credibility and then funding.
 
poshman said:
It was designed to provide news and services to all of australia, rural and metro areas. It was never meant to run agendas for certain groups. While claiming to be journalists they push only one side of the agenda.

Name a position that would be considered a Liberal position that they take... I will wait.

While they are meant to provide a news service they now push agendas. And they are then quoted as an unbiased source.

As they have moved from the main goal of a public broadcaster I hope for the day they go the way of NPR in the states and lose credibility and then funding.
Click to expand...
I am happy to agree they take a modern progressive left view on some issues, but that's only because the modern progressive left is dominated by minority rights agenda and the ABC rightly sees representing that as part of their charter as a public broadcaster, like classical music and sheep weather warnings which are also minority interests. I think the "bias" is just the nature of the beast of what a public broadcaster is.
 
I'm not a student of the ABC charter, but I'd have thought that the ABC must/should try and give equal representation to all participants in society. A result of this is that, fringe subjects/causes end up getting air time to the same or similar levels as mainstream subjects. I can see how a person of a certain opinion may see this as bias, although I wouldn't agree.
Radio is excellent,
and doing a lot of driving, is a big part of world news awareness. They have the country hour every day where I live, as well as AM and the other news shows. Front of mind news and caller feedback in the morning. More general stuff in the afternoon, Sport on weekends is fairly legendary depending on the code you follow. Heaps of local and national content. Through the years, there's been a number of ABC journalists becoming Labor members so I think it stupid to argue that employees wouldn't be Left, I don't think that the programming or subject matter is particularly biased apart from the support fringe examples above to show equality.
 
The Feeder Club said:
I am happy to agree they take a modern progressive left view on some issues, but that's only because the modern progressive left is dominated by minority rights agenda and the ABC rightly sees representing that as part of their charter as a public broadcaster, like classical music and sheep weather warnings which are also minority interests. I think the "bias" is just the nature of the beast of what a public broadcaster is.
Click to expand...

I am glad you see they take a progressive left point of view.

If you could name an issue even two where they take the opposite side I would be surprised.

Those are not minority based many are mainstream politics and they take the left stance, or even further the greens stance.

That is not part of a public charter. Look at their hires from the executive down... how many are on the centre right? Panel shows? Headlines? Editors?
 
Bicco said:
I'm not a student of the ABC charter, but I'd have thought that the ABC must/should try and give equal representation to all participants in society. A result of this is that, fringe subjects/causes end up getting air time to the same or similar levels as mainstream subjects. I can see how a person of a certain opinion may see this as bias, although I wouldn't agree.
Radio is excellent,
and doing a lot of driving, is a big part of world news awareness. They have the country hour every day where I live, as well as AM and the other news shows. Front of mind news and caller feedback in the morning. More general stuff in the afternoon, Sport on weekends is fairly legendary depending on the code you follow. Heaps of local and national content. Through the years, there's been a number of ABC journalists becoming Labor members so I think it stupid to argue that employees wouldn't be Left, I don't think that the programming or subject matter is particularly biased apart from the support fringe examples above to show equality.
Click to expand...

The radio is pretty good and when I am in the car I will listen to parts of country hour. The sports coverage depending on code is brilliant.

Name a policy they have landed on the same side or promoted that would line up with farmers? They are a minority. Name a policy in general where they land on the Liberal side.

So the employees are mostly from the left, we know editors and management are but we are meant to believe they are being unbiased? Like NPR?
 
Kram said:
They are rebuilding our town centre and demolished the old toilet blocks. Just noticed they have nearly finished the new replacements and they are all 'unisex'.

Haven't seen anything on fb yet but I'd reckon this will go down like a lead balloon.
Click to expand...

where is this?
 
The proposition is pretty simple.it is uncommercial for some (not all, but some) niche viewpoints to be aired by private mass media companies, in such a way that everyone is exposed to these views and has the chance to be well informed by hearing multiple viewpoints. So either you don't care, and are happy for those viewpoints to go unheard, or you suck it up and accept the taxpayer has a role in subsidising public broadcasting so we all have a chance to hear to them. You don't have to agree with them, I don't agree with a lot of them, but I don't get upset that I am hearing them.
Where the ABC has a problem is if double standards are used in investigative gotcha activist journalism, Louise Middleton style. She has one target, powerful white conservative men.
 
The Feeder Club said:
The proposition is pretty simple.it is uncommercial for some (not all, but some) niche viewpoints to be aired by private mass media companies, in such a way that everyone is exposed to these views and has the chance to be well informed by hearing multiple viewpoints. So either you don't care, and are happy for those viewpoints to go unheard, or you suck it up and accept the taxpayer has a role in subsidising public broadcasting so we all have a chance to hear to them. You don't have to agree with them, I don't agree with a lot of them, but I don't get upset that I am hearing them.
Where the ABC has a problem is if double standards are used in investigative gotcha activist journalism, Louise Middleton style. She has one target, powerful white conservative men.
Click to expand...

I understand the proposition, I am saying that they don't do that for minority view points that are not aligned with their ideology. That alone is enough to cut all funding, bar for sports and country hour. Then consider all panel shows, opinion and Middleton (plus others) and rather than a finger on the scale it is more like the full hand.

It isn't acceptable.

They allow the most gutter left wing accusations onto political panels, election coverage and more. If this was publicly funded and happening the other way I would still want them to shut it down. It doesn't help general discourse in the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top