Why can’t the ABC (or any network for that matter) have good investigative journalism/storytelling and good On-Air Presentation?
Because they’re funded by the taxpayer and the country has half a trillion dollars in debt it owes, and budget that has barely been in surplus since 2007. Money doesn’t fall off trees.
I won’t engage in triviailsing suicide. If you can’t discuss the issue I why raised and why you disagree with it I suggest that indicates an inability to win the argument. Ideas and debate are much more interesting to man than offensive emojis.
I am more than happy to engage in a discussion as to why ‘right’ views are vile. Perhaps this isn’t the right thread for it. I will reply a little later in ‘Federal Politics’ thread.
No thanks, I’ll discuss here, why news programming on the ABC needs to be fair and balanced. And contain a diverse range of views, even though we may disagree with them. It isn’t a propaganda machine or a mirror that reflects back a vision we want but isn’t real. People do vote for ‘right-wing’ parties and candidates in their millions every election. The ABC need to incorporate that decision into news programming and reflect the diverse opinions Australians hold politically.
Our public broadcaster does that day in day out. Sure, sometimes like with qanda last night you end up with discourse which tends to lean one way or another but this isn’t the case day in day out. The ABC has many centre right leaning personnel in it’s employ including Amanda Vandstone and constantly give the rabid right a platform including the likes of Alan Jones and Lyle Shelton - this despite most of what they spew out of their mouths being factually incorrect.
On the flip side, please do give me evidence where this is the case with the likes of Seven, NewsCorp and Sky?
Media Watch last night quite clearly spelt this out last night in fact.
The ABC have a duty to be FACTUALLY correct. It just so happens facts don’t align with many of the rabid right.
Haven’t numerous surveys and inquiries over the years found that ABC News & Current Affairs is for the most part, politically impartial and pretty much the most trusted media outlet in the country?
Of course that’s not to say they’re perfect (no news organisation is without their faults) or that the ABC shouldn’t be striving to do better, but I’d probably have more problems with the hard right skew of News Corp and talkback radio.
I’m well aware of how the ABC is funded, but this shouldn’t be used as an excuse to not maintain a visually appealing brand. SBS (which is at least partially funded by the taxpayer) seems to do alright in this regard.
Of course money shouldn’t be spend on branding at the expense of the actual content but at the same time, television is a visual medium. While priority #1 should always be the content, the ABC still needs to have acceptably visually appealing brands for their programs/channels otherwise people will not watch.
Who else? Name them please.
Peter van Onselen writes for The Australian. Sam Dastiyari does too. David Speers hosts shows on Sky, as does Stephen Conroy and Richard Marles used to along with Kristina Keneally.
What facts are you talking about specifically?
What was wrong with the look before last night?
Wasn’t the previous look for The Drum in use for about five years or so? It was starting to look dated IMO. No doubt a similar philosophy would’ve been applied to the general On-Air Presentation of the ABC’s main channel when that was relaunched on Sunday.
Who are the centre right leading personnel? The Q&A, Insiders and Drum panels are never balanced and are always dominated by people with left of centre views.
Does anyone know what studio this is coming from?
I remember Julia Baird addressing this issue last year - isn’t the problem that most of those commentators (allegedly) either refuse to appear or have exclusive contracts with Sky?
Possibly. Miranda Devine was on the show earlier this year. The bigger issue for me is actually balance. All efforts should be made to ensure there is equal representation on panel shows, but often, as we saw last night, you see people with similar positions and from similar places on the political leaning spectrum (left of centre), outnumber their counterparts.
Last night you had Amanda McKenzie Climate Council CEO (left), former staffer of Democrat US President Barbara Heineback (left), Graeme Innes (left), Kim Hoggard (right) and Eryk Bagshaw (centre?). Leftist views dominate. This is what happens on most ABC shows and they should take much more effort to get people from the right on to balance out the panels.
Monday’s Q&A was an absolute joke.
A lot is in the eye of the beholder. Bandt - almosy hard left, Wilke - centre left, Phelps - centre right, Sharkie - centre right, Banks - centre right. Given the focus was on the cross bench there are only another two options available, both of whom get a reasonable go on Q & A ad it is. Katter’s a social conservative but lingers around socialism economically, McGowan is also on the right.
Are there no right wingers on the Senate crossbench?
There are, but they dont hold the power to topple the current minority government in a vote with Labor, which does seem unlikely but a decent bargaining chip nonetheless.