Society/Culture Should Murdoch's Newscorp newspapers be called an unreliable news source like the Daily Mail.

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,805
Likes
6,124
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#51
"Climate change is real! It's definitely real! I just think we shouldn't do anything about it! Why I am ridiculed?!? :think:"
Imposing a carbon tax in Oz IS NOT doing anything about it. There are those with the intelligence to realise this and those who are not. You clearly are in the latter camp
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Apr 29, 2016
Posts
2,641
Likes
2,847
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Stoke City, Dortmund, San José, As
#58
Any sensible person can agree that the Daily Tele is the worst of the lot.

From trashy sports journalism (the NRL commentators are heavily despised by most of the sports fans) to silly conservative tribalism which extends to defending friends of the cause for being found guilty of serious crimes in court.

It's somewhat amusing they employ Hildebrand to save face.
 

Snake_Baker

Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
36,694
Likes
63,827
Location
Destination Club
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Pfffft, as if!
#59
Just saw a new global scientific study, that shows alarming and potentially catastrophic consequences , hardly given a mention in the Murdoch papers.Front page has 4 articles on Labor,one on the Greens and it's mostly a fear campaign in border security.The Daily Mail was recentlty taken off the reliable news source list by wikipedia. Is it time for the rest of the science denying papers to be added to the list? Four out if five climate change articles in The Australian recomnend no reduction in carbon emmissions.The Herald Sun is similar.Should we cop this from our newspapers and what can be done about it?
I'm surprised you require external validation.
 
Joined
Jun 30, 2017
Posts
3,530
Likes
2,814
AFL Club
GWS
#60
It’s not a free media when controlled by the gubmint

Hierarchy of Australian gubmint

Top - The actual Australian Gubmint (unaccountable)
-key stakeholders like Rupert Murdoch

Bottom - the elected dickheads (the facade)
-paid by the taxpayer to represent the actual gubmint and their interests


Operating within Australia is Australia’s media conglomerate, which includes Rupert Murdoch’s news media, therefore owned and controlled by our actual government.
 

Hawk Dork

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Posts
26,329
Likes
21,232
Location
on the road to nowhere
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawks
#61
It’s not a free media when controlled by the gubmint

Hierarchy of Australian gubmint

Top - The actual Australian Gubmint (unaccountable)
-key stakeholders like Rupert Murdoch

Bottom - the elected dickheads (the facade)
-paid by the taxpayer to represent the actual gubmint and their interests


Operating within Australia is Australia’s media conglomerate, which includes Rupert Murdoch’s news media, therefore owned and controlled by our actual government.
A tax bludging propganda front run by the unofficial supreme ruler paid for by the tax payers
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Jun 30, 2017
Posts
3,530
Likes
2,814
AFL Club
GWS
#62
A tax bludging propganda front run by the unofficial supreme ruler paid for by the tax payers
Yeah, I was wondering why the ATO were having all those ads on TV stating how great they are, for going after the big multinationals, so us plebs can enjoy... whatever benefit they're pretending to give us... this must have been a reward from our un-elected supreme overlord

If the ATO really wanted to show how good they are, they would be giving the ATO whistleblower "Employee of the year" rather than consecutive life sentences (funny if it wasn't true).
 

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Posts
18,448
Likes
17,537
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
#64
Imposing a carbon tax in Oz IS NOT doing anything about it. There are those with the intelligence to realise this and those who are not. You clearly are in the latter camp
I can see two clear problems with the former camp. The fact that they think they’re intelligent is one.

Australia accounts for circa 2% of global emissions. Cutting that by 30% still wont have a statistically meaningful affect on global temperatures.
If several countries with similar rates are all cut by 30% wouldn’t it have a significance?
 
Top Bottom