The future of the ABC - Guthrie sacked

[Power Raid]

CFMEU royal commission has turned up small change compared to the liberal party, half of Abbott first front bench has either resigned or been removed due to backhanders.

If you think what brickworks did is fine why the royal commission into the unions then.

yep, it's not fine. I don't know the details but corruption of any kind must be treated seriously or justified because someone else also does it.

it has to stop and individuals and entities held accountable.

 

[Kwality]

CFMEU royal commission has turned up small change compared to the liberal party, half of Abbott first front bench has either resigned or been removed due to backhanders.

If you think what brickworks did is fine why the royal commission into the unions then.

I'm suggesting paying for influence is accepted across the board by the political class - we are poorly served by ALL involved in the political process. Regardless of who is paying & who is taking the donations, its really just a form of bribe for future favours.

Get the idea you have a one eyed take on the process.

 

[rodney hoo]

I'm suggesting paying for influence is accepted across the board by the political class - we are poorly served by ALL involved in the political process. Regardless of who is paying & who is taking the donations, its really just a form of bribe for future favours.

Get the idea you have a one eyed take on the process.

If paying for influence is accepted, why hold a royal commission into the unions, if there using there power to look after there members or was it just a witch hunt to try and hurt the labor party and the unions.

For what it's worth I'm against corruption no matter who's side do it.

 

[Kwality]

If paying for influence is accepted, why hold a royal commission into the unions, if there using there power to look after there members or was it just a witch hunt to try and hurt the labor party and the unions.

For what it's worth I'm against corruption no matter who's side do it.

I think the Courts will sort out the issues of thuggery only.

No one could seriously deny that all parties accept money & look after the donors, and if you feel better by mixing that with Royal Commission on Unions, whacko, whatever floats your boat.

If you play in the political arena Rodney, the vast majority of those with you are failing Australia.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

If you play in the political arena Rodney, the vast majority of those with you are failing Australia.

What BS. The country has had 25 years of economic growth. Politicians do regularly stuff up, but they aren't "failing Australia".

Consumer and business confidence numbers have been down since Abbott got in, but that is a correct assessment of a government made up of idealogues, Howard hand-me-downs and 'wets' with no ticker. There is still plenty of reason for optimism.

 

[sherb]

The disgrace that has been the 60 Minutes kidnapping fiasco shows the depths that the media can plunge to when totally driven by ratings.

And, in so doing, it has reinforced the need for the ABC.

 

[rodney hoo]

The disgrace that has been the 60 Minutes kidnapping fiasco shows the depths that the media can plunge to when totally driven by ratings.

And, in so doing, it has reinforced the need for the ABC.

Yes an independent ABC without political interference and political board and management appointments like what's gone down with the sciro.

 

[Elroo]

Did anyone see the interview with Dutton on the 7.30 Report last night, too funny.
Almost a case of the who is the dummy (ventriloquist)?

MATT PEACOCK: Minister Dutton was non-committal at today's press conference, although if you watch carefully, his Border Force Commissioner, Roman Quaedvlieg, did mutter it was under consideration.

JOURNALIST: And will you grant amnesty for the 7-Eleven workers that could face losing their visas after being exploited by their bosses?

ROMAN QUAEDVLIEG, BORDER FORCE COMMISSIONER: Considering it. (very quietly but obviously trying to help but I don't think Dutton heard him as was getting ready for a 'nothing' answer which he duly delivered)

PETER DUTTON, IMMIGRATION MINISTER: Well, look, I think any of those matters obviously need to be properly investigated and the appropriate response be provided at the time, but there'll be a process for that to go through and we can make comment on that in due course.

Now we hear that 7-Eleven has sacked the independent panel to investigate the wage fraud at 7-Eleven as it was being too effective and uncovered millions of dollars in wage fraud.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/w...ublic-relations-disaster-20160512-gou149.html

When the opening line of 7-Eleven's press release turned out to be a blatant lie it didn't bode well for what came next.

On Wednesday the scandal-ridden convenience store giant issued a misleading statement that head office and the Allan Fels Wages Panel had agreed to "transition" to an internal unit within 7-Eleven. In other words it wants to do it itself and it wants us to trust it to do it better than an independent panel led by Fels, the former chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

The brutal reality is 7-Eleven has been trying to wind up the panel for months.

This is coming from a company that is battling a crisis in confidence, and a track record of years of underpayment of wages by its franchisees and a board that never acted on it......................................

...............................The brutal reality is 7-Eleven has been trying to wind up the panel for months. It has been assuring franchisees that the bill will be less than $25 million and they will never have to pay a cent in back pay.

It seems the Fels panel was too effective and head office feared a franchisee revolt. Fels had settled with 400 workers and it had cost the company $14 million. With another 2000 claims being assessed and more workers recently lodging claims, the payout could have been as high as $100 million – the biggest wage fraud payout in corporate history.

The big issue was that when the payout reached $25 million, franchisees would have to start paying their share – something that was causing a lot of angst.

 

[Lebbo73]

Now we hear that 7-Eleven has sacked the independent panel to investigate the wage fraud at 7-Eleven as it was being too effective and uncovered millions of dollars in wage fraud.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/w...ublic-relations-disaster-20160512-gou149.html

8 years ago, I was managing a Mobil service station and I used to go into other servos to check out the competition. One 7eleven had the same Pakistani working in it at 9am and then at 9pm at night. I told the Smiths Chips rep this, who I knew well as we lived in the same small country town when we were young. He said that that 7eleven worker was working over 100hrs/wk and he would go home after 6 months. After a month he would return and work another 6 months. All while being paid a fulltime wage. 40hrs pay for doing 100hrs work. It is probably more than they earn in Pakistan. You can't compete with these businesses!

 

[madmug]

8 years ago, I was managing a Mobil service station and I used to go into other servos to check out the competition. One 7eleven had the same Pakistani working in it at 9am and then at 9pm at night. I told the Smiths Chips rep this, who I knew well as we lived in the same small country town when we were young. He said that that 7eleven worker was working over 100hrs/wk and he would go home after 6 months. After a month he would return and work another 6 months. All while being paid a fulltime wage. 40hrs pay for doing 100hrs work. It is probably more than they earn in Pakistan. You can't compete with these businesses!

You can if they are made to comply with the law.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

The Drum website (not the ABC24 show) has been 'axed' apparently as a cost saving measure. I can't imagine it cost much, but apparently someone was in charge of it and there would've been some resources diverted to updating and moderating it when its existence wasn't really necessary. The main beneficiaries of it were the same authors we see in other publications (Mungo McCallam and the IPA's Chris Berg are recent contributors). I'm not sure where their journos will release their commentary now, however (like Barry Cassidy or Annabel Crabb). The Drum was under the ABC News site 'analysis & opinion' section so I guess it will remain but be updated less as it won't be seen to need regular updating.

In the story it noted the decision was taken by Gaven Morris apparently. I'm sure the new Managing Director was related too, but Morris took over Oct 2015. I thought this last election showed a quite considerable bias towards the Coalition. I know people have been saying Turnbull was a media favourite ever since he took over, but for me the notable bias took hold only after the new MD started.

 

[kranky al]

You can if they are made to comply with the law.

No no no

Let the free market with its invisible magical hand put everything to rights

 

[madmug]

No no no

Let the free market with its invisible magical hand put everything to rights

Is that like the magic trickle down effect that certain pollies seem to believe?. Is it Just like the one where if you reduce business taxes they will automatically go out & give everyone a job?

 

[Hawk Dork]

Its the same magic that drives Capitalism, exponential growth from finite resources

 

[rodney hoo]

The Drum website (not the ABC24 show) has been 'axed' apparently as a cost saving measure. I can't imagine it cost much, but apparently someone was in charge of it and there would've been some resources diverted to updating and moderating it when its existence wasn't really necessary. The main beneficiaries of it were the same authors we see in other publications (Mungo McCallam and the IPA's Chris Berg are recent contributors). I'm not sure where their journos will release their commentary now, however (like Barry Cassidy or Annabel Crabb). The Drum was under the ABC News site 'analysis & opinion' section so I guess it will remain but be updated less as it won't be seen to need regular updating.

In the story it noted the decision was taken by Gaven Morris apparently. I'm sure the new Managing Director was related too, but Morris took over Oct 2015. I thought this last election showed a quite considerable bias towards the Coalition. I know people have been saying Turnbull was a media favourite ever since he took over, but for me the notable bias took hold only after the new MD started.

My mother is in her mid eighties and reckons the abc has never been worse and showed bias to the liberal party and she is a swinging voter. I thought the bias was even worse than her but I never vote liberal.
As previously noted you destroy these organisations from the inside, Abbott was so destructive to a few organisations.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Keep accusing them of bias and they automatically compensate to be biased for you

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Keep accusing them of bias and they automatically compensate to be biased for you

Hey, it worked on Tom Harley and Cameron Ling as commentators. Both deathly terrified of appearing biased toward their own club. Harls is long gone but currently some Geelong supporters are growing to actively hate Ling in his current role. I don't.

After the match is done and dusted I find his squirming and back-footing kind of amusing

 

[Kwality]

The Drum website (not the ABC24 show) has been 'axed' apparently as a cost saving measure. I can't imagine it cost much, but apparently someone was in charge of it and there would've been some resources diverted to updating and moderating it when its existence wasn't really necessary. The main beneficiaries of it were the same authors we see in other publications (Mungo McCallam and the IPA's Chris Berg are recent contributors). I'm not sure where their journos will release their commentary now, however (like Barry Cassidy or Annabel Crabb). The Drum was under the ABC News site 'analysis & opinion' section so I guess it will remain but be updated less as it won't be seen to need regular updating.

In the story it noted the decision was taken by Gaven Morris apparently. I'm sure the new Managing Director was related too, but Morris took over Oct 2015. I thought this last election showed a quite considerable bias towards the Coalition. I know people have been saying Turnbull was a media favourite ever since he took over, but for me the notable bias took hold only after the new MD started.

So you are alleging the MD is directing content?

 

[sherb]

So you are alleging the MD is directing content?

She was installed as MD for a reason.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

So you are alleging the MD is directing content?

All it takes is her directing her heads of content that she is concerned about the bias she has witnessed and read about (she is from News Corp) or as the election is coming up she could say she wants to ensure that there aren't any controversies coming, especially considering the Coalition are the likely winners and are briefing all journalists that they are set to win comfortably.

There has been a considerable shift to the right. Even on Q&A which has had problems with being too left-wing, from the week of the election getting called to the election itself we had one show with only one politician - Pru Goward (Liberal) - and the show just before the election was 4 Coalition-friendly panelists to 1 Tanya Plibersek. Q&A is now in the News department after being shifted by the Liberals. The other news output by ABC TV and radio was similarly one-sided about 70-80% of the time when I heard it. They weren't doing what they usually do in elections either - that is switching hour to hour which side's angle they use. i.e. At 9:00 Bill Shorten says blah blah and Malcolm Turnbull responded; then at 10 switching the order and the consequent framing. Entire summaries of a days politics on a show like Lateline would come from the angle of just the Coalition. etc. They weren't playing fair.

 

[Kwality]

She was installed as MD for a reason.

And not one of the fine, unaligned, independent journos or their back room support staff have leaked the direction .... please !!

 

[Kwality]

All it takes is her directing her heads of content that she is concerned about the bias she has witnessed and read about (she is from News Corp) or as the election is coming up she could say she wants to ensure that there aren't any controversies coming, especially considering the Coalition are the likely winners and are briefing all journalists that they are set to win comfortably.

There has been a considerable shift to the right. Even on Q&A which has had problems with being too left-wing, from the week of the election getting called to the election itself we had one show with only one politician - Pru Goward (Liberal) - and the show just before the election was 4 Coalition-friendly panelists to 1 Tanya Plibersek. Q&A is now in the News department after being shifted by the Liberals. The other news output by ABC TV and radio was similarly one-sided about 70-80% of the time when I heard it. They weren't doing what they usually do in elections either - that is switching hour to hour which side's angle they use. i.e. At 9:00 Bill Shorten says blah blah and Malcolm Turnbull responded; then at 10 switching the order and the consequent framing. Entire summaries of a days politics on a show like Lateline would come from the angle of just the Coalition. etc. They weren't playing fair.

Must all be ratbags at the ABC, flip floppers, unprincipled ? Lightweights ? Trashing the brand? Take that Tony Jones ...

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

And not one of the fine, unaligned, independent journos or their back room support staff have leaked the direction .... please !!

As pointed out clearly in my post, there was also the elevation of a new head of News and I found the bias to overwhelmingly be on view through news reports. I don't know what your second comment means. Tony Jones is a very good journalist, but he has gone downhill since Q&A took him off the daily Lateline responsibilities. One positive, however, is that Q&A has been going back to the audience members far more to get feedback on how much the A responded to the actual Q.

You seem to also be dismissive of how sensitive someone would be to criticism and a potential change of boss. I'm not sure what you do for a job but a lot of people don't like to suddenly have their job stability shaken by a new regime coming in above them, or by criticism from the audience in the media world. Jones was criticised for interrupting Shorten too much and was far less intrusive with Turnbull. That's probably due to the criticism rather than Turnbull being Liberal, but it was said on Insiders that the Liberals were lying to journalists about how well their campaign was going and I think reporting across the entire media reflected a desire to be seen to be on the winning side. The difference between what was said pre-election and post-election is, frankly, a joke. People who had been saying a fortnight before the election that Labor had given up are now saying how the Liberals had never really connected with people.

 

[Kwality]

As pointed out clearly in my post, there was also the elevation of a new head of News and I found the bias to overwhelmingly be on view through news reports. I don't know what your second comment means. Tony Jones is a very good journalist, but he has gone downhill since Q&A took him off the daily Lateline responsibilities. One positive, however, is that Q&A has been going back to the audience members far more to get feedback on how much the A responded to the actual Q.

You seem to also be dismissive of how sensitive someone would be to criticism and a potential change of boss. I'm not sure what you do for a job but a lot of people don't like to suddenly have their job stability shaken by a new regime coming in above them, or by criticism from the audience in the media world. Jones was criticised for interrupting Shorten too much and was far less intrusive with Turnbull. That's probably due to the criticism rather than Turnbull being Liberal, but it was said on Insiders that the Liberals were lying to journalists about how well their campaign was going and I think reporting across the entire media reflected a desire to be seen to be on the winning side. The difference between what was said pre-election and post-election is, frankly, a joke. People who had been saying a fortnight before the election that Labor had given up are now saying how the Liberals had never really connected with people.

I perceive the journos in question are well & able to engage any new management, unlikely to be blowing in the wind.
The why & wherefore of the election campaign is largely perception IMHO - take the lies being told, its par for the course, a journo should do more than repeat a press release as if it is fact. What any party says is rarely the way it really is, & many of the people don't buy it, some do.

As for my own work experience, never a fan of the yes man.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

I perceive the journos in question are well & able to engage any new management, unlikely to be blowing in the wind.
The why & wherefore of the election campaign is largely perception IMHO - take the lies being told, its par for the course, a journo should do more than repeat a press release as if it is fact. What any party says is rarely the way it really is, & many of the people don't buy it, some do.

As for my own work experience, never a fan of the yes man.

News is reported constantly. No-one has time to have an extended debate about whether the coverage is fair or not. They would have an editor making tweaks to reports and that editor would be answerable to the head of News who is answerable to the MD. The difference in coverage for this election was notable, and it was unfair. There's always the chance that I just happened to catch the majority of reports that were presented in a Coalition way, but whenever I was in the car or got a chance to listen for an extended time, or when I caught reports on news, Lateline or 7.30 I was surprised that there wasn't a more conscious effort to be unbiased. Individual reporters or presenters were fine, if a bit too used to the Liberals' over-the-top rhetoric (which is why them complaining about the 'mediscare' campaign is laughable). Leigh Sales was criticised for being too kind to Turnbull, but I didn't see anything too bad. It was the packaged reports or the on-the-ground reporting from a few journos, coupled with the news reports which should obviously be the least biased. That's where the problem was. Some of them were probably just wanting to sound like they had got their analysis right by being pro-Coalition while they were backgrounded that the Coalition were going to win easily. That is still a concern, though. The biggest problem was the bias in news reports.