Scott Morrison - How Long? Part 3

[Chief]

Next thread:

Scott Morrison - How Long? Part 4

This is part 4. Part 5 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-5-the-stroll-out.1275975/

www.bigfooty.com

 

[DaRick]

Denial of fact (or at least the diminishment of those who can recognise fact) is a good look on you. Ever considered writing for news corp?

Murdoch mostly preaches to the choir IMO.

In Brisbane, The Courier-Mail aren't exactly taken all that seriously. I suspect Newscorp has a similar status elsewhere (Western Australia could be different, but TBH I don't see why).

The ALP's electoral difficulties have many causes and the media IMO is a minor one.

 

[wahooo]

Murdoch mostly preaches to the choir IMO.

In Brisbane, The Courier-Mail aren't exactly taken all that seriously. I suspect Newscorp has a similar status elsewhere (Western Australia could be different, but TBH I don't see why).

The ALP's electoral difficulties have many causes and the media IMO is a minor one.

Wasn't referring to Labor's electoral difficulties.

Just more outraged that certain publications with questionable editorial policies can have such influence over politics and debate in our society. The media will almost always certainly control much political debate in any society but the bare minimum standard that it should be upheld to is to tell the truth.

There's been countless examples of News corp failing to report accurately and factually. I mean James Murdoch's resignation seems ample evidence of some questionable behaviour going on. I don't care what side of politics News corp favours, it should be held to the same journalistic standards as others.

Murdoch certainly preaches to the choir but the sad and worrying fact is that, that choir represents a large percentage of our population.

I don't care about Labor's electoral difficulties, News Corps editorial policy and their reach is a stain on our democracy.

 

[JackOutback]

Murdoch mostly preaches to the choir IMO.

In Brisbane, The Courier-Mail aren't exactly taken all that seriously. I suspect Newscorp has a similar status elsewhere (Western Australia could be different, but TBH I don't see why).

The ALP's electoral difficulties have many causes and the media IMO is a minor one.

Murdoch may largely preach to the choir, but preach loud enough and often enough, and it creates a narrative that then gets picked up by ABC, Guardian etc that are supposed to be raging lefties trying to sneak the Labor Party past voters. Debt and Deficit Disaster was a national narrative driven by News Corp, as was the Carbon Tax. I wouldn't say it's the ALP's biggest issue, but it's more than a minor hurdle that the Libs simply never have to encounter (i.e. the dysfunction of multiple leadership changes that was rarely presented as dysfunctional as Labor's multiple leadership changes).

 

[Gough]

Murdoch may largely preach to the choir, but preach loud enough and often enough, and it creates a narrative that then gets picked up by ABC, Guardian etc that are supposed to be raging lefties trying to sneak the Labor Party past voters. Debt and Deficit Disaster was a national narrative driven by News Corp, as was the Carbon Tax. I wouldn't say it's the ALP's biggest issue, but it's more than a minor hurdle that the Libs simply never have to encounter (i.e. the dysfunction of multiple leadership changes that was rarely presented as dysfunctional as Labor's multiple leadership changes).

Tony Abbott was largely a News creation. A cursory glance at his political career could have foreseen the train wreck nature of government and the critical eye shone on his rivals never found it's way to him. Once they turned on him he was finished.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Tony Abbott was largely a News creation. A cursory glance at his political career could have foreseen the train wreck nature of government and the critical eye shone on his rivals never found it's way to him. Once they turned on him he was finished.

You could substitute the name Tony Abbott with Scott Morrison and it’s 100% accurate, possible even more.
Hopefully the last bit happens to him as well.

 

[Kwality]

Wasn't referring to Labor's electoral difficulties.

Just more outraged that certain publications with questionable editorial policies can have such influence over politics and debate in our society. The media will almost always certainly control much political debate in any society but the bare minimum standard that it should be upheld to is to tell the truth.

There's been countless examples of News corp failing to report accurately and factually. I mean James Murdoch's resignation seems ample evidence of some questionable behaviour going on. I don't care what side of politics News corp favours, it should be held to the same journalistic standards as others.

Murdoch certainly preaches to the choir but the sad and worrying fact is that, that choir represents a large percentage of our population.

I don't care about Labor's electoral difficulties, News Corps editorial policy and their reach is a stain on our democracy.

Are you imputing those who read the Murdoch Press are unable to recognise bias but you can?

Are there any other news sources that dress up opinion as fact that you consider bias?
Do these sources have a choir (your term) that are as poorly informed as those who read Murdoch?

 

[Kwality]

Murdoch mostly preaches to the choir IMO.

In Brisbane, The Courier-Mail aren't exactly taken all that seriously. I suspect Newscorp has a similar status elsewhere (Western Australia could be different, but TBH I don't see why).

The ALP's electoral difficulties have many causes and the media IMO is a minor one.

What Murdoch outlet in WA are you referring to?

 

[Vindicater]

Are you imputing those who read the Murdoch Press are unable to recognise bias but you can?

Are there any other news sources that dress up opinion as fact that you consider bias?
Do these sources have a choir (your term) that are as poorly informed as those who read Murdoch?

Both left and right leaning papers have bias and complete wackjobs writing for them.

The problem currently is that 60-70% of media is right wing so the right leaning wackjobs get more airtime.

 

[DaRick]

What Murdoch outlet in WA are you referring to?

I actually thought The West Australian was Newscorp, not Stokes.

My bad.

(Good thing I said that WA could be different! )

 

[Kwality]

Both left and right leaning papers have bias and complete wackjobs writing for them.

The problem currently is that 60-70% of media is right wing so the right leaning wackjobs get more airtime.

Do you not rank voters?

'The mob work you out' is not true?

Are papers widely enough read to be blamed for anything? Advertising dollars suggests NO.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

You could substitute the name Tony Abbott with Scott Morrison and it’s 100% accurate, possible even more.
Hopefully the last bit happens to him as well.

Scomo wouldn't have even made it into politics without his News mates white-anting the bloke who trashed him in pre-selection into oblivion.

 

[Vindicater]

Do you not rank voters?

'The mob work you out' is not true?

Are papers widely enough read to be blamed for anything? Advertising dollars suggests NO.

I am not really into blaming the media for all the lefts woes. Is a factor but only one of many.

I was more just pointing out that there are bias opinion pieces on both sides but that the right wing media gets more air time because there is more of it.

 

[Kwality]

I am not really into blaming the media for all the lefts woes. Is a factor but only one of many.

I was more just pointing out that there are bias opinion pieces on both sides but that the right wing media gets more air time because there is more of it.

Is there really?
Nine Group?
Seven?
The digital space?

 

[Vindicater]

Is there really?
Nine Group?
Seven?
The digital space?

Both nine and seven are right wing leaning.

10 is left leaning.

The digital space is probably about half and half.

 

[JackOutback]

Is there really?
Nine Group?
Seven?
The digital space?

You're not suggesting Nine and Seven are liberal, are you

 

[Kwality]

You're not suggesting Nine and Seven are liberal, are you

I asked the question.
I dont believe people are stupid.

 

[Kwality]

Both nine and seven are right wing leaning.

10 is left leaning.

The digital space is probably about half and half.

Not so sure about Nines newspapers, The Age.

All fairly visible imho, though the left/right activists cant see it EVER.

 

[Van_Dyke]

I actually thought The West Australian was Newscorp, not Stokes.

My bad.

(Good thing I said that WA could be different! )

they’re not news Corp but think they have some sort of cross-sharing with the Murdoch papers on the eastern state (stories from the CM/DT/HS pretty regularly pop up).

 

[HairyO]

Tony Abbott was largely a News creation. A cursory glance at his political career could have foreseen the train wreck nature of government and the critical eye shone on his rivals never found it's way to him. Once they turned on him he was finished.

Beazley was an entitled son of a politician
Crean was a union hack
Latham was the golden child of your namesake
Rudd was an aberration
Gillard was a union lawyer
Shorten an entitled kid who married his way to power
And finally we have an actual blue collar leader in the people's party.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Beazley was an entitled son of a politician
Crean was a union hack
Latham was the golden child of your namesake
Rudd was an aberration
Gillard was a union lawyer
Shorten an entitled kid who married his way to power
And finally we have an actual blue collar leader in the people's party.

Latham was from housing commission so was Rudd

Keating was the son of an engineer
Hawkes dad was a Priest ???

Howards dad ran a petrol station

 

[HairyO]

Latham was from housing commission so was Rudd

Keating was the son of an engineer
Hawkes dad was a Priest ???

Howards dad ran a petrol station

Latham was brought up through the Labor system under the wing of Gough.

Rudd's wife was worth tens of millions.

Keating despised poor people.

Hawke was 30 years ago.

Its taken the ALP a long time.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

They really need two auslan interpreters for Scomo

One on each shoulder.

 

[DaRick]

Wasn't referring to Labor's electoral difficulties.

Just more outraged that certain publications with questionable editorial policies can have such influence over politics and debate in our society. The media will almost always certainly control much political debate in any society but the bare minimum standard that it should be upheld to is to tell the truth.

Generally agree, though I must point out that your average Australian is rather apolitical. If anything threatens our democracy, it's that your typical Australian is IMO too disengaged from matters regarding politics and the national interest, rather than because Murdoch is shifting them in a certain direction. I agree that he couldn't give two shits about democracy or the national interest, but unfortunately that's hardly unusual for media moguls because their interest (making money) usually doesn't align with the national interest.

There's been countless examples of News corp failing to report accurately and factually. I mean James Murdoch's resignation seems ample evidence of some questionable behaviour going on. I don't care what side of politics News corp favours, it should be held to the same journalistic standards as others.

ABC aside, sadly the media in this country are not really held to any particular standard, short of not violating defamation/hate speech laws. I think Fairfax's political reporting is generally much better than Newscorp's, but I don't know if that's because they're being held to any higher standard. Rather I suspect that Fairfax's audience might be more highbrow and Fairfax are simply pandering to their crowd - in that regard, they're not perceptibly different from Murdoch in my view.

Actually the traditional media forms are struggling and IMO the real thing we should be worried about is not just political parties using social media to influence voters, but extrapolating forward, also using subscription services like Netflix to do so. Luckily, such services have so far tended to resist the lure of advertising dollars, but as the subscription service market saturates I don't expect that to continue. Businesses always aim to maximise their profit, and in markets that become saturated, the market share enjoyed by any given player will invariably decline. This is because the more players there are in a market, the more likely there is to be 1) a service that fits any given person's needs better than some other service due to overlap, in this context regarding programs offered and 2) some innovation that forces other players to scramble for revenue (in this case, maybe some feature that allows viewers to immerse themselves in whatever universe they're watching ala virtual reality).

Under those circumstances, advertising revenue will become very enticing, thus giving politicos a means of bookending programs with political ads at around election time. If a relatively extremist party does it first and wins more votes, I would assume that the two majors would try and co-opt their policies to some degree (ala Howard with ON). It's not as if we haven't seen political parties break new ground in disseminating political propaganda (Nazis using the Zeppelin in the 1930's, the ALP/Dems using social media in the late 2000's).

I would be surprised if subscription services didn't capitulate to the sweet dollars provided by advertising within the next 5-10 years, and I'd be even more surprised if political parties didn't piggyback on that.

Murdoch certainly preaches to the choir but the sad and worrying fact is that, that choir represents a large percentage of our population.

I don't care about Labor's electoral difficulties, News Corps editorial policy and their reach is a stain on our democracy.

Yes, but I reckon that the sort of people who take Murdoch seriously are unlikely to vote ALP in the first place.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Generally agree, though I must point out that your average Australian is rather apolitical. If anything threatens our democracy, it's that your typical Australian is IMO too disengaged from matters regarding politics and the national interest, rather than because Murdoch is shifting them in a certain direction. I agree that he couldn't give two shits about democracy or the national interest, but unfortunately that's hardly unusual for media moguls because their interest (making money) usually doesn't align with the national interest.



ABC aside, sadly the media in this country are not really held to any particular standard, short of not violating defamation/hate speech laws. I think Fairfax's political reporting is generally much better than Newscorp's, but I don't know if that's because they're being held to any higher standard. Rather I suspect that Fairfax's audience might be more highbrow and Fairfax are simply pandering to their crowd - in that regard, they're not perceptibly different from Murdoch in my view.

Actually the traditional media forms are struggling and IMO the real thing we should be worried about is not just political parties using social media to influence voters, but extrapolating forward, also using subscription services like Netflix to do so. Luckily, such services have so far tended to resist the lure of advertising dollars, but as the subscription service market saturates I don't expect that to continue. Businesses always aim to maximise their profit, and in markets that become saturated, the market share enjoyed by any given player will invariably decline. This is because the more players there are in a market, the more likely there is to be 1) a service that fits any given person's needs better than some other service due to overlap, in this context regarding programs offered and 2) some innovation that forces other players to scramble for revenue (in this case, maybe some feature that allows viewers to immerse themselves in whatever universe they're watching ala virtual reality).

Under those circumstances, advertising revenue will become very enticing, thus giving politicos a means of bookending programs with political ads at around election time. If a relatively extremist party does it first and wins more votes, I would assume that the two majors would try and co-opt their policies to some degree (ala Howard with ON). It's not as if we haven't seen political parties break new ground in disseminating political propaganda (Nazis using the Zeppelin in the 1930's, the ALP/Dems using social media in the late 2000's).

I would be surprised if subscription services didn't capitulate to the sweet dollars provided by advertising within the next 5-10 years, and I'd be even more surprised if political parties didn't piggyback on that.



Yes, but I reckon that the sort of people who take Murdoch seriously are unlikely to vote ALP in the first place.

Post of the thread.

 

[DaRick]

Murdoch may largely preach to the choir, but preach loud enough and often enough, and it creates a narrative that then gets picked up by ABC, Guardian etc that are supposed to be raging lefties trying to sneak the Labor Party past voters. Debt and Deficit Disaster was a national narrative driven by News Corp, as was the Carbon Tax. I wouldn't say it's the ALP's biggest issue, but it's more than a minor hurdle that the Libs simply never have to encounter (i.e. the dysfunction of multiple leadership changes that was rarely presented as dysfunctional as Labor's multiple leadership changes).

There is some truth here, though I'd say every outlet would spin that sort of narrative differently (with the ABC being the most objective).

It's true that the LNP have the backing of the Murdoch media, but it is also true that many Australians broadly distrust the media, and methinks the political media are not much different.

The Australians who actually read/view much political media are quite likely to be politically active in the first place, and in this country such types tend not to be centrist. The thing is, though, that most Australians broadly hover around the centre.