text:
Change afoot for public broadcasters: don't stuff it up
The appointment of the Honourable James Spigelman AC QC as the next chairman of the ABC comes at a crucial time for public broadcasting in Australia.
The new chairman takes up his duties as the Gillard Government completes its 'convergence review' with a new media regulatory regime for what is called 'the digital economy' expected to change the way content can be produced and exploited.
Complicating this is the Finkelstein inquiry's recommendation that a new statutory regulator - the News Media Council - be established by law to regulate print, online, radio and television. Please note that print is to be included in this statutory regulatory regime for the first time. Broadcasting has been government-regulated from the outset of radio in the 1920s. But not print. Both the Australian Press Council and the UK Press Complaints Commission are voluntary 'self-regulation' entities.
Ray Finkelstein QC was appointed to inquire into media power and standards in Australia following the News of the World phone hacking scandal in the UK. The proposed Australian News Media Council, and a similar regulatory reform which may emerge from the Leveson inquiry in the United Kingdom, could bring to an end centuries of acceptance of the principle of freedom of the press in our Westminster parliamentary democracies. All this has been brought down on the media industry's head by the excesses, criminality and abuses of power emerging from the malevolent culture of Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation. Well done, Rupert! Your bullying and intimidation of the politicians and peeping Tom journalism looks like destroying freedom of the press in the UK and Australia. If and when royal assent is given to government regulation of newspapers, the screaming headline should read: RUPERT MURDOCH DESTROYS FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
After years of campaigning to get defamation laws in this country uniform and trending pro-publisher for the public benefit, after years of campaigning to get shield laws to protect the courageous sources of journalists engaged in genuine public interest disclosures, public support for journalism has rapidly receded. Now some parliaments are moving to bring in strict privacy legislation as a justified reaction to media invasion of privacy, driven largely by Murdoch tabloidism and the lucrative paparazzi market in commercially exploitable voyeurism. But the obvious fear for committed journalists is that such privacy laws will be manipulated to build walls of secrecy behind which skulduggery and malfeasance can flourish. Our campaigns for journalism and the public benefit have been set back years.
Rupert Murdoch is a disgrace to journalism.
After decades of supporting industry self-regulation in print, journalists are entitled to be angry. Under statutory regulation, adjudications on journalists' work are written largely by lawyers employed by the government-appointed authorities.
In the United States, fortunately, freedom of the press is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution prohibiting the making of any law abridging freedom of speech or infringing freedom of the press. This will prevail through the digital revolution.
There is no bill of rights in Australia which could enshrine such progressive principles here. Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation are opposed to a bill of rights in Australia.
Through the phone hacking scandal and other revelations concerning News Corporation since, the media landscape has changed significantly.
And then there's technological change.
With the National Broadband Network (NBN) now rolling out, Australians are about to experience a technological upgrade which will bring the digital revolution into every household. Already retail consumers are buying more cheaply online from offshore suppliers, sending the department stores and shopping towns into a worried reworking of their business models.
The NBN will plug Australia more comprehensively into the global economy. There are great opportunities for entrepreneurs and innovators developing ideas from an Australian base. But there is also the adverse aspect of Australian money being electronically transferred at the click of a mouse to suppliers and providers offshore at the destructive expense of the domestic economy.
In media, convergence comes through the digital revolution and merges broadcasting, telecommunications and broadband/internet to smash national boundaries, empowering domestic audiences to browse the world wide web and access text, audio and video content from any URL in the world. You can also now beam your digital TV at your wi-fi modem and watch worldwide television on the big screen in your living room at no additional cost, even downloading it to a hard drive for more convenient viewing at a later time. You can be the scheduler. While exciting for audiences and consumers, this is fraught with danger for Australian content producers. It must be remembered that we would not have a local TV production industry without the 55 per cent local content quota imposed by legislation since the start of television in 1956. The current broadcast licence system imposes news and other content creation obligations on licensees.
Those financiers seeking to claw back the massive debt they took on through unwise investment in commercial free-to-air TV licences in Australia are pushing the Federal Government towards what they call 'regulatory parity'. That could be taken as code for the same regulation for all platforms or simply for no regulation at all. It seems unlikely that the current Federal Government will, through its response to the final convergence report, put the local content industry at risk from complete deregulation, but you never know until you see the detail. The interim convergence review recommended that the allocation of a broadcast licence 'should no longer be a precondition for the provision of content'. The principle underpinning this change is said to be:
...that individuals and enterprises should be able to communicate freely in a converged environment.
If regulatory obligations are to be imposed, they should be imposed consistently, irrespective of the delivery platform.
What do they mean 'if'?
Australians at work in the local content industries, and future generations seeking careers in the sector, should now be praying to our political and regulatory masters that they do not stuff this up.
There's always the ABC and SBS to save local content creation, you might argue. The ABC and SBS should be pivotal to independent content creation, but only if they are adequately funded for the task.
Already the ABC has an internal problem sustaining current levels of multi-platform output with already inelastic operational funding.
And there has been a dispute about a management strategy to outsource to the commercial TV production sector all drama, all documentary and most features programming. In some states like Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia, local ABC content creation including local sports coverage is being destroyed.
Public broadcasting supporters want a genuine mixed production model where the ABC retains a critical mass of the intellectual property and the archive instead of surrendering all copyright to vested interests in return for a first-time showing with some repeats.
This model of commissioning content is commercialising ABC TV programming where co-investors (state and federal screen and film financiers and lotteries funds etc) only sign up to a program idea's business plan which they consider to be bankable. That is why more and more ABC content seems to be mimicking commercial Underbelly-style formulaic fare.
In one laughable episode of a recent Underbelly derivative, a fictionalised tattooed thug was lacerated to death by fake tropical stingers in a Cairns swimming pool. With one or two exceptions, audiences are underwhelmed by the ABC's junk outsourced drama. Think undertainment. The ABC has made itself totally reliant on this external funding model while the ABC Board has expressed no concern whatsoever about the deskilling of the broadcaster and centralising production in Sydney and Melbourne.
So much for our commitment to training, finding and developing fresh creative talent.
There needs to be an audit into this external funding model to see exactly to whom the work and the money has gone. There is no transparency in this contentious process and no formal report on the productivity and cost efficiency of the model published in the ABC's annual report to parliament. Why is this so?
Inside the ABC we are expecting substantial staff redundancies unless the broadcaster can persuade the Government to increase operational base funding from the now rescheduled triennial funding period starting from the federal budget in May 2013. With both federal Treasurer Wayne Swan and Opposition spokesman Joe Hockey out-promising each other in rapid deficit reduction, the demonstrable pressing needs of the public broadcasters are unlikely to get a look in.
And SBS's current funding position is dire. SBS, transformed into a commercial 'whore' by the Carla Zampatti/Gerald Stone board some years ago, has been interrupting TV programs with incessant low-rent ads. That strategy has not built this broadcaster into Australia's fourth commercial TV channel as the 'visionaries' once hoped. SBS ad revenue 2010-11: $50 million. Audience loyalty: destroyed. The Federal Government so far has failed to heed the pleas of SBS supporters to rescue SBS from this full-scale commerciality, although the Government is under pressure to help save the broadcaster from possible insolvency with some carry-on funding.
SBS chairman Joe Skrzynski - coincidentally a mate of ABC chairman Spigelman's - has been sounding more multicultural as he tries to reaffirm what SBS is here to do: service the inclusive needs of Australia's forever expanding migrant populations.
At the ABC, news management has engaged consultants from the United Kingdom for an objective look at how the ABC gathers its news across platforms: multi-channel domestic and international radio, television and online. The management has assured already-pressured journalists operating under budget cuts (no over-time, no travel, freelance and casual work cut) that the consultants are not on a cost-cutting time-and-motion exercise. Sounds reassuring.
But there has been free use of the term 'platform agnosticism' in their UK nomenclature. Presumably 'platform agnosticism' means not believing in any one delivery platform. This may mean that ABC journalism is about to be restructured to meet the immediate and relentless demands of continuous news first and foremost.
News programs like the state-based 7pm TV news on ABC 1 (audience one million plus) may soon be rendered just part of the 24/7 continuum to be thrown into a continuous roster with the ABC's multi-channel News 24 and network radio's NewsRadio and ABC Online.
The big problem is that to be credible as a news source in Australia for which taxpayers are willing to pay, the ABC must maintain a strong journalistic presence across the regions of Australia. This is primarily achieved in radio. TV is capital citybased. Those of us hoping to enhance localism through TV digital multi-channelling have watched cynically as TV and radio go more network, not less. It is undoubtedly cheaper. But what is the ABC for if it cannot exploit digital multi-channelling to build services for local/regional audiences?
Public broadcasting supporters will have to be vigilant and belligerent on this point. The ABC already is Sydney-centric and Sydney-based financial controllers do not seem to be able to see beyond their breath-fogged windows at Harris Street, Ultimo.
So Memo to ABC Chairman Jim Spigelman: Welcome to the ABC, Mr Chairman. Please ask the Managing Director to explain how outsourcing all TV production except news and current affairs is cost efficient when production facilities in which taxpayers have invested millions go idle; when half an hour of an outsourced TV satire proves to be more expensive than a high end drama? Please ask the MD to explain how the relentless demands of multi-platform broadcasting can be sustained in the medium to longer term without a significant enhancement of operational funds? Please ask the MD to brief you on exactly how you, as chairman, can persuade a government in deficit to adequately fund the ABC given other deserving demands on the public purse. Please ask the MD to explain how he intends to downsize the ABC in the likely event that neither a Gillard nor an Abbott government will assist the ABC to confront the biggest problem it currently faces: sustainable operational funding.
And Memo to SBS chairman Joe Skrzynski: Please make a sincere public apology on behalf of the SBS Board to your audiences that you made a monumental mistake in breaking into programs with advertising. Please formally ask the Federal Government to legislate to amend the SBS Act to prohibit advertising on the broadcaster so that the commercial networks can recover the revenues that you as a taxpayer subsidised entity are filching from them. Wear a hair shirt as a symbol of your contrition and then go about rebuilding SBS's support base in the now diverse and growing ethnic communities of Australia. These communities can be powerful allies for a re-funding strategy to rebuild SBS after the folly of the Zampatti/Stone era.
The ABC and SBS are great national media institutions and content creators and deserve to be supported. SBS's multiple language services are vital to Australia's success as an inclusive multi-cultural society. Through the digital revolution both the ABC and SBS have extended their engagement with and immense value to the Australian taxpaying public. A re-investment above current levels of funding will see the ABC and SBS grow and enhance their creativity and journalism. A pause to that investment will only bring contraction, endless repeats and, in the case of SBS, more galling ads interrupting documentaries, films, news and current affairs programs.
Through their effort in digital multi-channelling over the last five years both the ABC and SBS have been instrumental in persuading Australians to switch to digital TV. Around 90 per cent of all households are now digital, enabling the Department of Communications to complete analogue transmission switch-off next year - 2013. Accordingly both the ABC and SBS have a strong case to incorporate their saved analogue transmission costs (2010-11 $95million in the ABC's case) as part of their annual operational base funding appropriation. Therein lies survival for both broadcasters in the short term.
While the commercial print and broadcast media companies fight for their own survival through the digital revolution, and in some cases from drowning in their acquisition debts, the public broadcasters' future is by no means secure.
While all in the Australian media industry hope the digital revolution produces more opportunities for content creation, not less, public broadcasting supporters, like their commercial counterparts, will have to fight hard as policy and regulation are fundamentally rewritten.
Let our content creation mantra be: THINK GLOBAL… CREATE LOCAL!
And, as a sub-heading... PLEASE DON'T STUFF THIS UP!
Quentin Dempster is an ABC journalist and ABC staff-elected director 'in exile'. He is a former chairman of the Walkley Advisory Board. This article is published in next month's Australian Press Freedom Report 2012. View his full profile here.
Topics: abc, information-and-communication, television-broadcasting, radio-broadcasting, print-media, journalism, broadcasting, federal-government
Comments (171)
Comments for this story are closed.
Rosetta Miniata:
11 Apr 2012 3:44:02pm
The ABC is long overdue for some culling,cleaning and re-jigging.
The online fora is the ideal place to start.
11 Apr 2012 4:57:20pm
As much as I winge and whine, they do alright and seem to comprehend digital better than the commercial lot.
the yank:
11 Apr 2012 6:37:21pm
I'd like the ABC on line and those that contributre to this media to actually apply its coed of conduct.
Otherwise just dump it.
12 Apr 2012 8:27:21am
What a surprise, the Yank calling for less democracy because he doesn't like other peoples opinions (especially if they dare criticize Obama or Gillard).
If you don't like the Drum you can leave it. While I find many contributors views offensively deranged I am happy that they are able to express them and debate them.
The Drum is a great way of engaging in a larger discussion about issues that are largely ignored by the decepticon media and all views and positions should be accepted.
The only minor issue I see is the amount of time/space given to professional lobby groups, failed bitter ex politicians and 'tell-you-what-to' think tanks. But that's largely an editorial failing.
12 Apr 2012 12:30:41pm
I'd like the yank to admit that as an ex-union hack who took fees from those "people worse off then myself" and went to lunch on them (yes yank, you are not so anonymous as you might like to think you are), has no credibility whatsoever to criticise the way the government funded broadcaster runs its online operations.
Clean up your own backyard before you start to question how others run their ship. Unions supposedly have Codes of Conduct too, in case you have forgotten.
11 Apr 2012 6:50:16pm
I strongly disagree.
I love the ABC and SBS.
11 Apr 2012 8:49:19pm
Nothing will beat the ABC & SBS
As for dumping the ABC as the yank says and viewing on commercial stations yank rubbish for the brain dead that is dumped on Australia is just not on.
I as a tax payer deserve the right to choose what to watch on TV and I like many others do not choose to watch the dribble and utter crap that is served up by the tabloids which they class as entertainment.
If you class gyrating idiots making fools of themselves, unbelievable shoot em up and bang bangs entertainment then I suggest you get mummy to wipe the dribble off your face, tuck you into bed and kiss you goodnight.
11 Apr 2012 9:47:52pm
You betcha'. The ABC in particular. It raises the standard of public debate in a way that Americans, for example, can only dream about.
If some Republican in the pocket of a big corporation makes an outrageous statement, they can avoid having to answer for it, by just appearing on Fox News where no-one will question them on it.
Here, an ABC news journalist or the 7.30 report can generally be counted on pull them up for it.
And then you have investigative teams like "Four Corners" doing investigative journalism in the background.
Who would provide our daily antidote to the poisonous administrations of Limited News, if it wasn't for Aunty?
12 Apr 2012 8:58:54am
"Here, an ABC news journalist or the 7.30 report can generally be counted on pull them up for it."
Rubbish, we regularly watch the cosy little fireside chats with ALP or Green politicians where they are not questioned and generally fed answers, answers are not pursued, and lines of questioning just fall away.
Unless it's a coalition politician, and then they are attacked relentlessly.
Watch Barnaby Joyce being interviewed compared to any Green senator you like .. cheese and chalk.
Stoops to conquer:
11 Apr 2012 9:12:29pm
For good or for bad the ABC is about the only broadcaster looking after the public interest - be it by programs like Media Watch or for providing forums such as this site. The rest of the Australian media sings with the same tune - and a right wing one it is too - and one would have to go back to the Soviet Union to see any similar centralisation of one point of view beign perpetuated in any nation as it is here.
The ABC though loses respect for its over all clunkiness and ineffeciancies which I sort of hope the new head prioritises. 'Sort of', because like many others I am over the substandard media and broadcasting in this country and moving on to other forms, mostly foreign.
On-line is the way of the future and the much heralded ABC' Iview' is a piece of junk! How could umpteen episodes of 'Doctor Who' for example be classified as a 'documentary'; and its been like that for weeks, not a momentary oversight - filling up the seats available for legitimate documentaries. Attention to the outlet is obviously just lip service and perfunctory.
Half the programs aired never get to Iview for online viewing anyway! SBS is little better keeping with their typical overkill maintaining politically correct immigration tripe programs available for months on end; with decent quality programs again either never making it or disappearing after a few days with the propaganda crap remaining.
So that's what we have in Australia - a strong cohort of right wing media that the public broadcasters feel forced to balance by presenting politically correct propaganda that diminishes and undercuts what made us the attractive nation we are. So frustrating! Like most things the truth is in the middle, and none of our media can find it.
Small wonder that increasing numbers, especially the tech savvy, are deserting the local content in droves and seeking escape in quality programs downloaded via the internet where 'Game of Thrones' for instance can be watched unpolluted - ad free - eons before the commercial stations in Oz get around to inculcating it with with their brain deadening advertising. And the ABC are not event in the hunt.
I wouldn't be surprised if the ABC stupidly follows SBS into the advertising morass.Wow, what an attractor! So smart. Only more will stop watching when they relaise there are alternatives. Its a brave new world that the local media still cannot fully come to grips with. Likely they will be left behind with paper newspapers as an quaint anachronism of decades past. God speed the day!
12 Apr 2012 10:21:34am
What about about this tender process for Asian broadcasting. I believe it was The Australian which exposed this anti-democratic disaster, with precious little comment from the ABC.
Criticism of the Murdoch press seems to be a knee-jerk, lefty, reaction, often with no justification.
12 Apr 2012 11:51:19am
Dear Burke I suggest you read more than the Tele,The Australian and the Sun Herald,you might learn something that the Murdoch press don't mention as regards Murdoch honesty and truth.
All unknown in the Murdoch press but make it quick the investigation in to the criminal carry on at NEWS LTD has reached the US
12 Apr 2012 1:13:53pm
What, like the illegal and criminal carry on at Fairfax? Hacking ALP database?
You don't have to go as far as the US to find such things .. oh wait,t hat's not News Ltd, oh dear, well let's all just forget I mentioned it shall we, don't want some embarrassing information or facts lying around do we now?
11 Apr 2012 9:29:39pm
Off topis, but seeing as how many people have hopped into the ABC I'm going to stick up for them. I believe that ABC tries quite hard to be impartial. It may not succeed always but even as I roll my eyes sometimes I believe its heart is in the right place. I'd recommend looking back on the "contributors" link here. There is every flavour of politics and every colour of the rainbow. I'm sure some of the more one-eyed here will object that even one article by their particular hate-fetish is too many but that's what balance means, balance.
A Cattle Station:
12 Apr 2012 12:14:54am
Maybe the ABC could then take the time to respond to complaints about it's Walkely Award winning journalists, as per it's Code of Conduct.
Like those who perjure themselves in front of Senate Inquiries and claim they don't know Live Export is seasonal. And even though they had 4 recorded responses to a question repeated 4 times, the segment was then edited to show the person's silence when it was asked a fifth time. It is a disgrace and the taxpayer funds it.
Bob Jelly:
12 Apr 2012 9:34:32am
Why don't you waste even more of your time and ask Media Watch to investigate this.
Two rules at the ABC.One kicks in when covering arse, the other when bolstering ratings.
11 Apr 2012 3:47:22pm
Jim Spigelman seems a great improved prospect for leading the ABC. While Mr. Scott had a businesslike approach, a growing sly intrusiveness of his "class" has become apparent. Spigelman will listen to the Dempsters and others, hopefully, to make a balance and drive sorely needed at times. Get rid of the virus of extreme business types, the IPA particularly.
Big Polloodah:
11 Apr 2012 5:19:24pm
The last thing we want at the national broadcaster is diversity of opinion.
Better that we follow your recommended approach, which is to create the sort of state broadcaster that the Cubans have.
11 Apr 2012 6:00:36pm
If diversity of opinion is properly upheld then I would imagine we should see a daily article from the Communist Party of Australia to view in conjunction with the IPA literature. The CP of A should also hold a spot at the table on the TV version of the Drum.
Since we don't, I think Paradise has a valid point.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 7:16:32pm
Yeh and why stop with the CP, the options are limitless- League of Rights, Rise Up Australia Party (Danny Nulliahs new party) Storm Front, etc wow what a hoot!
11 Apr 2012 8:16:01pm
Couldn't agree more! This constant swill served up by the IPA must end or as you've pointed out be balanced, what we get on the drums IPA one night then Peter Rieth, then IPA,......
11 Apr 2012 9:10:33pm
As a conservative I would happily read CP of A articles and comment.
Good for a laugh, or just a different perspective. I likely will not agree but since when has disagreement been so wrong?
12 Apr 2012 12:26:43am
The communist party of Australia has not existed for decades.
12 Apr 2012 8:33:44am
When did the IPA represent 'diversity of opinion'. It represents mainstream corporate opinion, the same mindless dribble freely available on all Fairfax and Murdoch outlets.
While they have their place spitting their 'free market' bile on the public, they get far too much time as a single organisation that has very very few employees and barely any research department.
They never veer from a pure party political line and their individual contributors are heavily edited internally before being submitted to the Drum.
11 Apr 2012 8:48:44pm
I am finding it hard to respond, my sides ache from laughter at your pointless lefty arrogance and conceit.
As one of those virus types (around forever, incurable and always adapting), though hardly of the IPA variety, I do question the lefty need to demand the ABC represent only their views.
But having read any number of your posts, I can see that alternative opinions scare you though I would rather you grow a pair and actually try and see that different POV's are a good thing. Sometimes even yours might have some merit! :-)
11 Apr 2012 3:47:57pm
"So Memo to ABC Chairman Jim Spigelman: Welcome to the ABC, Mr Chairman. Please"
Put the ABC up for Sale, sell it to Fox, whatever they bid, it's worth it.
If you won't sell it off:
Ignore all the rent seekers in the ABC who all just want to sustain their cosy welfare based occupations.
Cycle all the current staff out of their reliance on the taxpayer, while ignoring the fact they are supposed to provide balance, and get them all work experience in the outside world.
Shut down all overseas services, if we need news, use currently available wire services. It is not the BBC, it is the ABC, trying to pick the bits of the BBC that best suit their self interest.
The ABC has become a monumental boondoggle, the word "epic" is just not descriptive enough of the self interest and sense of entitlement that is the culture there.
Finally, employ some conservatives, in every state in every branch .. you know, for balance!
11 Apr 2012 4:32:23pm
Extreme-right wingers want to drag everybody to the right, so they accuse impartial media organisations of being left-wing. It is an obvious ploy, and one which underestimates the intelligence of the Australian public. It might work in the US, but not here mate.
11 Apr 2012 8:24:09pm
See, the lefties always have to exaggerate
"extreme right wingers"
it's not extreme to ask for or expect balance Nina, try to express an opinion without resorting to hysterical emotive language, plase
11 Apr 2012 9:24:04pm
Well said Nina, and you said the other word that's coming-US.
11 Apr 2012 4:48:34pm
"Finally, employ some conservatives"!
Just watch the Sunday morning show "The Insiders" and see how many "conservatives" are permitted to air their views. They outnumber the other side by quite a bit.
Thank goodness Andrew Bolt is no longer a recular.
11 Apr 2012 8:26:20pm
So on one show, for one hour a week on TV, you have one conservative .. ("thank god Andrew Bolt is no longer a regular" .. he wasn't on every week anyway)
On none of the radio, and no where else in the ABC Australia wide is there a single conservative on staff .. and your complaint is about one token outsider conservative once a week on one TV segment of the ABC
Wow, that's just so tolerant of you, not!
11 Apr 2012 8:39:05pm
"They outnumber the other side by quite a bit."
What? What Insiders are you watching, the one on the ABC is run by a leftie ex-staffer of the ALP, Barrie someone or other.
So they have Barrie and 3 guests, one of whom is usually an ABC staffer and the other some ABC luvvie from industry like David Marr
One conservative is all they ever have, because in all of Australian media there are only a handful of conservatives
Unless you reckon David Marr is conservative, or Annabel, or Barrie .. please, you're embarrassing yourself trying to invent porkies like this.
11 Apr 2012 8:51:02pm
Yes, he was so bad he took the chance to host his own show which rates better.
I am not actually a fan of either show: AB's is too simplistic and Insider's is more often a lefty love-in.
dubious the third:
11 Apr 2012 5:11:36pm
Unawares you may be mick, but you've hit the nail on the head. The mandate of the ABC is to present balance. Balance as to what?
Is the role of a Public Broadcaster to offer balance to the corporate media?,
or, is it to be "balanced" unto itself, so that the corporate agenda is promoted in equal measure?
This seems to have been the drift of late, even over to the side of corporatism.
11 Apr 2012 6:04:03pm
So you expect us to believe that all this will somehow benefit who exactly? The commericial media is a dogs breakfast of corruption and commercial fatuousness. You want them as the sole proprietors of our information services? Yeah, right.
Mark James:
11 Apr 2012 7:59:01pm
mick wants the ABC to employ some conservatives?
Well, they have:
MICHAEL KROGER, former Victorian Liberal Party president.
ROSS MCLEAN, federal Liberal member for Perth between 1975 and 1983.
JUDITH SLOAN, conservative labour market economist with links to the Centre for Independent Studies and the H.R. Nicholls Society.
LEITH BOULLY, member of the Northern Territory Young Country Liberal Party.
PETER HURLEY, associated with Liberal Party donors and The Free Enterprise Foundation.
JONATHAN SHIER, previously president of the Victorian Young Liberals and an adviser to a federal Liberal minister.
MARK SCOTT, staffer with the former New South Wales Liberal minister for Education, Terry Metherell.
MAURICE NEWMAN, close confidant of former Prime Minister Howard.
RON BRUNTON, News Ltd columnist, Institute of Public Affairs.
STEVEN SKALA, director at the Centre for Independent Studies.
JOHN GALLAGHER, conservative QC.
But I get the feeling mick would not be happy until such time as the ABC either folded, or Rupert Murdoch took over the corporation and staffed it entirely with his trained poodles.
12 Apr 2012 9:03:07am
Do they all work for the ABC?
Next you'll be claiming tradespeople who do work at the ABC. are employees.
These are not employees Mark.
Come on, name all the conservative EMPLOYEES, please.
Particularly the radio comperes, the TV hosts and the writers .. who are employed, as employees by the ABC, not people who submit the odd article.
Why are you avoiding the question? This is so typical of lefties.
12 Apr 2012 9:36:38am
You can throw Uhlmanns name in the mix,So far to the right he counts as ten.
Do a Wiki on him.
Make sure you're sitting down.
12 Apr 2012 10:09:25am
His wife is a sitting ALP member of the house of reps ..
He denies being of conservative nature
wiki .. is written by anyone who feels like it, please don't assume everything you read is correct or unbiased .. it just might appeal to you, but that doesn't make it true.
I read it though, what's the problem I should be "seeing" there that shocks you? (13 years at the ABC?)
He is certainly not right wing or conservative .. you probably mistake honesty for conservatism, he is honest I'll give him that, and passionate and clearly intelligent.
Mark James:
12 Apr 2012 10:48:02am
bruce/mick, it was inferred that the ABC needs to hire some conservatives, and I've provided a list of conservatives who have worked at the ABC in the last 10 years.
As far as your request for the political affiliations of every tradesperson, TV host, radio compere and writer working at ABC, I'm not ASIO. I can't help you there.
Maybe you could do some work yourself and provide a list of non-conservatives employed by the ABC? Any less that 13 means the ABC is biased to the right.
12 Apr 2012 11:12:12am
those are all contributors, not employees ..
and a couple of board members, who are also, not employees
come on Mark, flush out some conservative employees, radio announcer, writers, TV comperes ..
stop avoiding the issue
employees .. don't you understand the term?
Angus Grogan:
11 Apr 2012 8:35:35pm
There's nothing honourable about conservatism. It has just been proven that right-wing thinking stems from mental laziness. No bright ideas were ever born out of conservative thinking.
11 Apr 2012 9:00:47pm
Considering John Howard stacked the board of the ABC. "to the rafters" with right-wing afficionados, who, in turn, stacked the dept's with more of their own and so on and so forth, overseen by that over-masticated piece of chewing gum ; Sen. Alston..creating a sort of "fifth column" media enterprise for the services of conservative opinion, one has to wonder where right-wing posters do their research before blundering into the deep end of the pool!
This is the problem confronting reply posting to such obtuse posters. In light of their lack of knowledge, either deliberate or natural, does one treat them as stupid, ill-informed, dumb, plain "simple-minded" or just bloody-minded?
It's a fair question...the moderator must supply balance, but the shallow intellect of such right-wing commentry is surely deficient and unworthy of equal consideration against reasoned debate? The above post to which I reply gives example of low wit and even lower intellect! Surely, it would be more fair to apply a two for one posting against such pitiable attempts at discusion?
12 Apr 2012 9:05:43am
Name the conservatives who are employed at the ABC.
It should be easy for you, since it's stacked to the rafters.
Who are the radio hosts, the TV comperes, what shows are conservative in nature?
Name all the current affair programs that are right wing
"In light of their lack of knowledge, either deliberate or natural, does one treat them as stupid, ill-informed, dumb, plain "simple-minded" or just bloody-minded? "
Yes, I know what you mean, some folks just plain outright invent stuff .. hmmm?
12 Apr 2012 9:49:04am
This is the worrying thing about right-wing commentry, Bruce...there doesn't seem to be this subtle "fine-tuned" antena discerning the obvious...leaving out "counterpoint", that piece of band-width permission to push the "new fascism", leaving out ABC. journalist Ms. Hewett's defamatory "branding" of the market-based carbon trading scheme as a "tax"...then ALL journalists jumping on the opportunity wagon for a bi'-of-a-giggle....forgetting the numerous eye-wincing Uhlmann/ Abbott interviews...Did I say ; "interviews"...sorry, I meant adorations!...overall announcements from the national broadcaster quite often begin with : "Despite the fumblings of..." "The oppositions accusations of incompetence toward..." .."After another distasterous week for..." "Even the bad polls didn't deflect the Prime Minister from..." AND such forth and so on and on and on ....But Hey!...we don't even have to worry about THAT.. because here, on the Drum we have Annabel Crabb to repeatedly remind us!...and even "that ol' leftie" Baz Caz will swing this way and that depending on how the coin fell!
12 Apr 2012 10:49:48am
bruce please name all the 'lefties" at the ABC ?
I mean not just your opinion either ?
Evidence, have you seen there voting papers at the ballot box ??
or is it that you just do not like a particular line of questioning towards a Hockey or Abbott ?
I would suggest over the many years that i have watched the abc all sides of politics cop a pasting including those greenies !
12 Apr 2012 11:26:05am
So I ask you to name the conservatives,
and, you can't
OK, just say so, I can direct you to all the lefties at the ABC .. all the employees there. Prove it .. why, it's a typical leftie dodge, because you can't answer my question.
There was one I believe, must have been 5 years ago - Peter Costello once asked a Melbourne well known morning radio host during an interview if there were any Liberal voters in the ABC .. the response was, "yes there is one, in West Australia" .. silence .. the stunning realization, they actually know where the one Liberal voter is.
Says it all doesn't it?
12 Apr 2012 12:33:42pm
i cannot name the conservatives and why should i care how many conservatives or so called lefties work at the abc ?
bruce its called balance and if it was as biased as you claim the likes of peter reith the IPA and many others would not be given any air time or opportunities to post on this forum and give their views on many varied subjects.
So your wrong and just deal with it, your biased.
12 Apr 2012 1:21:50pm
Why should you name the conservatives?
it's a challenge to prove a point, the point being the ABC is NOT balanced since they do not provide a single conservative announcer, writer, compere with employment.
Publishing articles form a few conservatives is hardly balance - they appear on a print edition of opinion. No "air time" at all
Now if there was to be balance, they would have writers, TV comperes and radio announcers .. surely.
Would you admit that not a single public figure in the ABC, who is conservative, is unbalanced?
So there you go, I'm not wrong .. and your post actually supports my point, you can't name anyone so refuse and call me names .. nicely done sir, you are biased and cannot see it.
(and it's you're biased, not your biased .. you're welcome)
12 Apr 2012 2:25:33pm
its "from" not "form" sir and your biased.
deal with it.
11 Apr 2012 10:24:51pm
Hi Mick,
Where is the outside world in relation to the inside world and what sets them apart? Which one do you work in?
12 Apr 2012 8:22:15am
the outside world where you have to compete .. not the world where you effectively have tenure and can pretty well retire on the job if you want - that's the perception, and it's backed up when you hear some of the folks or read their pap, that they lack life experience in the world where the rest of us reside. We all nod and move on, knowing full well we're dealing with idiots, who get our money regardless.
I've worked in both worlds geo, how about you?
hugh carnaby-sirius:
11 Apr 2012 10:46:26pm
"Ignore all the rent seekers in the ABC who all just want to sustain their cosy welfare based occupations."
I guess you mean all the IPA contributors, the 20 plus conservative politicians (including Reith and Abbott) who have written in this site, and the serial Labor haters like Donnelly and Barnett. All welfare bludgers in their own right - they believe in the redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich.
11 Apr 2012 3:48:42pm
Put the ABC up for sale, sell it to the lowest bidder.
11 Apr 2012 6:12:08pm
I did reply to you, Rusty, in an earlier post..short, sharp, concise and instructive AND in the vernacular..but the moderator chose to censor it AND I would suspect quite rightly, this being a family timeslot...although, I would like to believe that the moderator, being much more sensitive and perceptive than yours truly, just may have considered the "given instruction" a tad beyond the capacity of the receiver to carry out!....best wishes anyway, Rusty, in such an endeavour!
11 Apr 2012 8:55:17pm
Whoa, now here's the kind of person we need to keep track of, so that when evidence of being off the rails is asked for, we can all quite rightly say,
"yes, there was evidence he was a psychopath, he often posted bitter and twisted things on the national broadcaster's opinion forums, when he disagreed with other people's opinions".
"he made sinister veiled threats about having "given instruction", whatever that meant in his little private hell.
11 Apr 2012 6:31:32pm
If the ABC is so broken that you think it needs to be sold off to a corporate-owned network, then why are you even reading this website and commenting on it? Go back to Today Tonight and Kochy and Mel where you are comfortable.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 7:23:25pm
This was proposed a few weeks ago in Murdoch's Sunday rag in Adelaide. What are you doing here- Getting your 8 cents worth? The ABC is a great govt asset, just needs a new visionary at the helm. You must live in the city, because in regional OZ ABC radio does an amazing job with local emergencies, news etc until digital sometimes the only TV reception.
12 Apr 2012 7:26:22am
It's a running joke with conservatives and has been for years emma, it's certainly not new .. or unique to Adelaide.
If you had broader horizons, you would certainly have heard it before.
11 Apr 2012 3:59:19pm
A fine bucket, timely and well-delivered.
Mr Spiegelman, please also examine (with a view to correcting) the insidious but constant drift of ABC reporting and opinion toward the political Right. This has been going on since the stacking of the Board by the former Prime Minister (and his Communicatons Ministers) and is doing at least as much, if not more, to damage the esteem in which the ABC has formerly been held.
Le blogeur gai:
11 Apr 2012 5:12:24pm
Spot on Miowarra.
"The Drum Opinion" is a CLASSIC example of the political right being pushed down our throats on a daily basis.
If it's not Peter Reith with one of his too numerous opinion pieces, it's former Liberal staffers, IPA flunkies, Judith Sloan, Peter Reith, former Liberal Ministers, Peter Reith, HR Nicolls Society flunkies, Peter Reith, IPA flunkies, Peter Reith .....
It's time the ABC moved back to truth, fair and balanced reporting.
If it's manufactured news and biased reporting we want - we already know we've got Murdoch for that!
11 Apr 2012 7:40:58pm
Conroy's tender process is pretty fair and balanced, not.
11 Apr 2012 9:55:37pm
So to hell with opinion and free speech...
12 Apr 2012 9:07:45am
So you'd prefer to force left wing eco rubbish down our throats?
Do we complain about all the leftie writers on staff and contributors at the ABC, the conga line of eco whackos who "contribute"?
When will we see some skeptical climate change articles I ask, constantly .. where's that balance gone huh?
11 Apr 2012 5:28:47pm
Miowarra, glad to hear you belief night is day, I had started to think no one except labor voters were catered for on the ABC, however you do seem to be a different type altogether.
About once a month I check the ABC & can only endure a few minutes of the one-sided views. Worse than expressing labor views, it depicts them & CORRECT, which by default means no others are acceptable. Not bad for a Neutral tax payer funded broadcaster!!
joseph west:
11 Apr 2012 7:45:21pm
yes maurie. do watch insiders, or listen to the excretious counterpoint. we do need a neutral tax payer funded broadcaster, but it appears that richard alston is still steering the ship.
11 Apr 2012 8:57:44pm
At least the likes of Bolt admit their bias (the ABC sometimes does admit its liberal agenda, but not often) and he has standing invitations for any and all ALP ministers, flunkies, Flannery's and spin meisters, and his blog, whether one likes it or not, dwarfs this one and, I think, is the largest nationally.
The likes of Miowarra and LBG are happy to exclude competing views. If you don't like Reith, ignore him. I do as I find him rather boring. As for claims of stacking the ABC board, it was a small influx of respected people and not all at the same time.
11 Apr 2012 10:52:34pm
"...I had started to think no one except labor voters were catered for on the ABC..."
Miowarra covered that bit when he said "...the insidious but constant drift of ABC reporting and opinion toward the political Right."
12 Apr 2012 12:42:40am
You're checking out the ABC now. There is plenty more to watch, read and listen to besides news. The regional broadcasting is very important to various localities in less populated areas. News content is only part of it. The plethhora of assertions that ABC journalists primarily want to push a political agenda is barely worth dignifying with a response.
Feet Slipper:
11 Apr 2012 5:49:02pm
No, that's unfair. We need more about enterprise and job creating, not less.
hugh carnaby-sirius:
11 Apr 2012 11:22:04pm
Enterprise and job creating? When did the right whingers ever do that?
Oh sorry, I forgot - the Australian Public Service grew 5% per annum in the last 6 years of the Howard government. Job creation to support his enterprise of bribing voters
Feet Slipper:
12 Apr 2012 6:50:05am
You don't mean Canberra of course?
the working man:
11 Apr 2012 4:11:30pm
Quentin, forget about changes to the public broadcaster, there needs to be
some serious changes made to the " Shock Jock/ attract the lunitic fringe
comments that are made on air. We live in an increasing violent and unpredictable
world. When loud mouths like Jones says the PM and Greens leader should be
placed in a bag and dumped at sea we are fast heading down the American
crazy way in political comment.
11 Apr 2012 4:56:09pm
It gets worse when a PM in waiting, and relentlessly demanding an immediate election, viciously states in Parliament that the PM and Minister Albanese should have targets on their foreheads. Amazingly, some sections of the media actually concurred with him. A very disgusting and unsettling state of affairs.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 6:41:52pm
The old parliamentary privilege trick could do with a re-tune.
Lessons in etiquette and dignity a must before the first sittings every year. There's a precedent that's been set with boorish bully behaviour. A few members come to mind and predominately from the lib/nats.
11 Apr 2012 9:01:03pm
Yeah yeah, once Gillard comes clean about the Australia Day riot and her attempts to smear Abbott unconscionably, I will take your offence seriously.
Abbott's comments on that issue were silly, but hardly of the same calibre as the actiuons of Gillard's Office, which she was allowed to distance herself from after it stuffed up, a distancing that should never have happened. Anyway, it is not as if Albanese and Gillard are innocent of outrageous statements in parliament.
12 Apr 2012 8:01:24am
Speaking of boorish... Why do so many "dudes" (as in useless city persons) assume every article posted here is a green light for low grade political slagging and off topic comments? Why don't one of you create a virtual-world game along the lines of "Fantasy Question Time, a haven for the smug". An opinion is like a backside, everybody has got one. Only a few of them are good to look at, plenty are ugly.
This media enquiry report is not small beer in the scheme of Australian media. Fair dinkum!
12 Apr 2012 9:19:14am
Stalga, if we had an objective media rather than the fest of fact-impairment, blantant political bias and political activism then we would cool our heels and conduct a reasoned debate on the facts the media presents. Unfortunately, with few exceptions the media generally pursues agendas for political outcomes and liberally indulges in proganda at the expense of truth, or at least fails at a decent attempt to research the facts..
I, and many others I suspect, have merely adapted to this state of affairs where truth gives way to media political bluster. We seek a carthartic release from an informational environment full of BS. What's good enough for some biased journalist or radio scream jock is good enough for the rest of us.
By the way, I am a very proud born and raised city person. And, where does a country hick that you appear to be, by your comment, get off using the Americanised term "dude"? That term is reserved for young city folk.
12 Apr 2012 1:19:12pm
Ron, the comment was aimed solely at the blogger above me. he used the term dude earlier this week. I am not overly familiar with these forums. I suppose I naively assumed it would be more constructive. No offence was intended to anyone with two eyes.
I am proud to have been born and schooled in Sydney. I have spent half of my adult life in Brisbane, my field is agriculture. I assume that when you say fact impaired etc.. you are referring to the whole spectrum. Cheers.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 6:37:28pm
Yep, and if those comments weren't offensive to everyone of us, they should've been. I can't believe he wasn't charged with something. Thankfully I've never heard the show. Controversial excerpts are enough, thanks.
To comprehend the power he wields is all too much for me. And to think he has a loyal audience is even a more frightful thought. Who are these people, that listen to his provoking diatribe?
11 Apr 2012 8:57:52pm
Like inciting a riot, oh wait, didn't the ALP do that on Australia Day?
Shouldn't someone have been charged with that?
11 Apr 2012 10:44:36pm
Calm down, Mrs Peel, Jonesy's not real. Surely he's just Barry Humphries's latest creation.
As Humphries is hanging up his glads quite soon I expect the highly amusing Alan Jones Hour to come to a sudden halt.
Can't wait, personally speaking. As satire it's hilarious, of course, but I can't help imagining a War Of The Worlds-type scenario whereby people might switch on their radios and believe the twaddle he's speaking is real!
12 Apr 2012 8:10:39am
No laughing matter my good man. I always get the urge to run for the hills. Fools me every time. Come to think of it he fools a lot of people. Oh well, chin up I suppose, nothing lasts for ever.
hugh carnaby-sirius:
11 Apr 2012 10:54:43pm
"I can't believe he wasn't charged with something. "
Unfortunately under Australian law you can only prosecute human beings. Jones, Hadley, Akkerman, Bolt et al. are exempt.
12 Apr 2012 12:54:24am
Emma, you don't want to hear it either. I had to endure some of it at work last year. In my region, only 220kms west of Canberra.There are essentially only 2 AM radio stations to choose from. Redneck wonderland! Jones is not bound by a code of ethics as far as I know and has his pernicious formula down to a fine art.
12 Apr 2012 1:14:06am
The Inquiry is in part due to concern that the degenerate and illegal journalistic practices that occured in the UK do not happen here. The upshot is that it is going to make it harder for investigate reporters to expose wrongdoings.
Quentin says that now their hands will be tied, thanks to News Corp reporters doing things like hacking a murdered girls phone and any celebrity or public figure they could.
It is also addressing the change to the technological revolution,among other things.
11 Apr 2012 4:12:21pm
Most of all - let's hope Mr Spigelman can get top dollar for the ABC and we can use the money for something useful like dams.
11 Apr 2012 10:27:38pm
ABC is the only network I watch. No TV reception here so its just iview. Sell the ABC I will be really upset.
Why are you even here anyway? See something you like?
12 Apr 2012 7:56:21am
YeH, more dams like Wivenhoe, Brisbane's flood mitigation dam that QLD Labor filled with water for reticulation?
Another Labor stuff-up that caused pain for hundreds of thousands. As usual, a few public servants are taking the rap, rather than the real culprits, the left wing pollies.
Concerned for Quentin:
11 Apr 2012 4:12:28pm
Dear Quentin,
Please have a Bex and a good lie down.
Concerned for Quentin
PS - I promise that neither Rupert nor his legion of the damned will be hiding under your bed
11 Apr 2012 4:44:08pm
Do not buy murdoch media ,so none of his rubbish is under my bed.
11 Apr 2012 4:17:12pm
I seem to be the only person commenting - perhaps I'm the only person who cares.
As a long time ABC & SBS viewer, sadly I watch very little on
the ABC - and while programmes such as Julia, Woodley, are
made, I'll watch even less (of the repeats). I do believe the
ABC spread itself too widely, 4 channels - good quality viewing is impossible surely, but then there's The Killing
Nor do I live in the eastern states - so little of 'local' product is shown - another reason for not watching - I understand that people in Sydney believe their world is the only one worth knowing about - guess what, I don't care.
However, I've read some wonderful books lately (Tuesday book club, with a set of 'pretend' volumes behind it - says it all really, the state of the ABC. It's just the real thing..
Until a few weeks ago, there was a site, 'Have Your Say".
This has been binned, instead I see there is a more controlled site, with the programmes/topics chosen. Totally boring, if the ABC had employed some of the people who
contributed to the 'Have your Say' there would have been some programmes with damn good lines. There is no wit,
no dark humour, sigh, .. i'll have to wait for Rake for this I guess. So much for 'our' ABC
So, it's RN during the day or Tony Delroy for a quick pre sleep listen
Sue Bennet
South Australia
11 Apr 2012 4:29:53pm
well if the ABC changes any more to only reflect the views of the ALP, it will soon be able to count it viewers by looking at the ALP members. Sadly a dwindling few & hopefully keeping pace with union members.
Paul Pott:
11 Apr 2012 6:49:18pm
I last voted Labor in 1983 and I can't believe anyone would vote for any of the major parties, but I rely on ABC radio for my news and my impression is that the LNP particularly Tony Abbott seems to get a free run. How many times do we get a news item starting, "The leader of the opposition said today...." or, "In response to the leader of the opposition today the Prime Minister said...."?
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 7:32:07pm
I reckon Tony must treat his press secs like 24/7 slaves (well he would given his views on industrial relations) Action man is everywhere all the time. Never seen/heard/read so much coverage of an opposition leader. But take note, he is extremely selective of interviews. Cunning as a fox and we witnessed how PM Gillard was treated by 4 CRNS. Anyone that speaks of bias she re-watch that episode!
joseph west:
11 Apr 2012 7:54:31pm
yes. their abc is all about "the leader of the opposition says..." with nearly every news bulletin. glad i'm not the only person noticing.
Paul Pott:
11 Apr 2012 6:54:53pm
I last voted Labor in 1983. I rely on ABC radio for my news and if you think the ABC is biased towards the ALP I just wonder what world you live in.
11 Apr 2012 4:36:30pm
There will be two moons in the sky when ANY commentator from the world of media has ANYTHING POSITIVE about ANYTHING that's happening in AUSTRALIA. We live in comparative luxury, we have respectable institutions, we care about the Environment, we care about the sick, we care about freedom of speech, we care about Education. In other words, we care about MOST issues that a civilised society should.
Just for once, could the Drum find a commentator to reflect our attributes?
11 Apr 2012 9:06:20pm
The sunrise was awesome today, and my cup of tea is fiercely strong and eminently drinkable!
Oh, and the checkout girl who served me today had a lovely smile.
Plus I am hoping to get engaged soon.
Yep, things are good even though I am disabled (but remedied soon), on a pension and have depression (being treated).
11 Apr 2012 4:40:39pm
Living on the NSW Central Coast there is an issue with my ABC. I have lived in my current house for 6 months and on Sunday realised that I have not been able to receive ABC TV for the whole time.
I do occasionally download a program of Iview for colleagues (for school use), and read the website. I very occasionally come to the website if I am looking for news
I used to have my radio welded to ClassicFM, but no more - now with all the world music and sonic files nonsense on the breakfast & drive programs and Margaret Throsby moved to my lunchtime (I don't want someone yammering when I want to unwind after spending a double year 9 followed by a double year 10). Itunes and my Ipod have replaced the wireless.
Can I have a refund of my 8c a day please ?
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 6:52:55pm
Well, if it's taken 6 months that's a worry-
A) you either don't have a TV
B) nothing on the ABC appeals
C) you don't have electricity
D) you don't realise you can get an aerial for reception
E) you haven't bothered to contact the ABC
F) you haven't asked anyone if they have a similar problem
otherwise you must just love ads, USAian TV and reality shows.
12 Apr 2012 8:36:55am
a) yes I do - 2 in fact
b) bingo !
c) yes I do even have solar panels
d) yes I have an aerial, 2 actually to fix an issue with another channel (we didn't put it there)
e) yes I did on monday - it is a known issue in this area - nothing will be done until analogue is switched of
f) straw poll of neighbours either side + across the road + a collegue who lives next suburb over all have same problem
No I don't (which is why I use a downloader to view SBS content)- I use itunes & channel BT to get what I am interested in (watched series 10 of Spooks as it was seen in the UK), as well as Amzon to get the DVD versions when available
You don't address my criticism of the "dumbing down" of Classic FM at times when I want to listen
11 Apr 2012 4:47:40pm
Quentin, what a lecture in professional journalism! Congratulations for your clarity of mind, courage and vision. For the first time somebody has the guts to lay the blame squarely on the abusers of freedom and manipulators of information for the need to regulate the media.
R. Ambrose Raven:
11 Apr 2012 4:51:54pm
Sadly, nothing demonstrates better the need for an excellent, independent public broadcaster than these critiques of the ruthless, aggressive, exploitative, shallow, and often highly political mainstream media. Our ABCs role is to produce Australian content that informs, educates, and entertains using Australian cultural values. It provided a very good alternative for those outraged at commercial media behaviour.
Sadly, far from being the excellent, independent, full-service public service broadcaster that it should be, what was Our ABC has degenerated into Their ABC - little more than a shell used as a cash cow for the profit-seeking media production sector, Macquarie Bank's apparently lucrative transmission monopoly, Newscaff journalism displaying a capacity for indefinite degeneration, self-censorship and a senior managerial drive for mediocrity.
For that, ABC CEO Mark Scott is largely responsible. While most of the Hard Right Board that appointed and supported him is now gone, it is usually difficult for a Board to challenge an apparently successful CEO. But he isn't. His departure, even to the BBC, should be welcome.
Their ABC's pitiful drama output means that funding has been either or both of misappropriated to fund ABC24 or wasted on uncoordinated and inefficient floggings-out rather than on the excellent internal TV production capacity the ABC once had. Our ABC is now limited to the specialist programmes on Radio National and Classic FM.
While for many years the ABC was rightly able to justify far more money than it was receiving, the situation now is unfortunately far less favourable. Yet, we increasingly see a reactionary bias very few of us would want to fund. Now, no true believer could campaign for the ABC as it is. It would have to be substantially re-oriented, with most of the most senior staff sacked.
Tony P Grant:
11 Apr 2012 6:09:00pm
Yes, RAR....the voice of balance is but a memory.
It has to a degree (ABC) become "SSDD" broadcasting!
11 Apr 2012 4:59:58pm
I really feel it is time we the people take some responsibility for the actions of those we elect.
Pollies are us in society not an alien breed.
Therefore the heading should be get your submissions in, acquire knowledge and avail yourself of the truth so you can make the right decision on this subject.
What we have here is a good article but it is trying to be divisive, like slipping a hot knife through butter this story is trying to upset, disrupt and divide.
What a shame.
11 Apr 2012 5:11:40pm
Quentin...Well said. Well written. Well timed AND well about time!!
11 Apr 2012 5:36:37pm
Quentin, the murdoch press is privately owned so can lean left or right (in this case right).
The ABC is publicly funded so must stay in the centre, but it nearly always leans left. That is wrong and should be fixed.
11 Apr 2012 5:55:23pm
This statement about ABC left bias is not backed by any of the available evidence but I expect that will simply confirm your view. Perverse I know but that is how the conservative mind set works.
11 Apr 2012 6:14:51pm
Gweneth..."works" is perhaps TOO strong a word!
11 Apr 2012 8:30:45pm
Name a conservative presenter or writer on the ABC staff ..
I can name all the left leaning writers and presenters .. since, it's all of them
11 Apr 2012 6:36:18pm
There is far more right-biased reporting on the ABC than left-leaning commentary. If the balance is off in either direction it is definitely leaning to the right. I agree that the publicly-funder broadcaster should be centrist, or at least have an equal representation of both views. The influence of corporate power, and the LNP-backed media set, has been acutely obvious on the ABC for a long time now.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 6:57:00pm
So, the old Auntie being a leftie fallacy again- I wish it were. One can only live in hope.
11 Apr 2012 6:00:22pm
Wrong. Correct headline is 'SANCTIMONIOUS LEFTIES DESTROY FREEDOM OF PRESS'
Those poor lefties struggle with the thought that people who have opinions with which they disgree are actually allowed to express them. So they want to shut them done, and Voila! The Finklestein report.
the working man:
11 Apr 2012 7:17:12pm
Geoff, you are so far of the mark. The born to rule's have not
excepted the 2007 or 2010 election results. Do yourself a favor
and read a book called Wingnuts - how the lunatic fringe has
Hijacked America by John Avlon. You will find it sound very
much like the News Limited press, shock jocks and the extreme
right lead by Abbott.
Chimpfinga Custard:
11 Apr 2012 7:18:12pm
Sooner the better.
We only have trash media left in Australia.
Murdoch is millimetres away from criminal charges.
He crossed the immoral unethical line decades ago.
Mark James:
11 Apr 2012 7:45:17pm
geoff, if you read the Finkelstein report rather than imagine it, you'll find it recommends that media organisations simply abide by the codes they have agreed to abide by.
Nothing more nothing less.
So, it does not recommend restricting the press any more than the press have agreed to restrict themselves.
The point of difference is that Finkelstein acknowledges self-regulation hasn't worked and suggests the codes be enforced not by media organisations (who have obviously failed in their task), but by an independent body.
For the record, I don't support Finkelstein's recommendations. But I believe they should at least be debated with something approaching honesty.
In addition, it's worth mentioning that the broadcast media is already subject to a Finkelstein-like overseer (The ABA), and there is no evidence (see Alan Jones) that this independent body has restricted or censored speech in any way that could be considered a threat to democracy.
11 Apr 2012 9:07:46pm
True mate, but they are so very convinced that they are right and we are wrong.
But we ARE right!
hugh carnaby-sirius:
11 Apr 2012 11:12:56pm
"Those poor lefties struggle with the thought that people who have opinions with which they disgree are actually allowed to express them."
I have no complaint with right whingers (or loonie lefties) expressing opinions. I understand that the likes of Bolt, Akkerman and anyone from the IPA, are unreliable witnesses and unlikely to say anything of consequence (or factual accuracy).
I do have a problem with a newspaper owner who tries to influence democracy by publishing cherry picked 'facts', rhetoric, half truths and opinion disguised as news. Lies on the front page, retractions on page 39. Murdoch does it, Fairfax does it and increasingly the ABC does it.
It's time to start reporting what actually happens, not rumour, conjecture, pseudo-analysis and ill-researched opinion.
I also have a problem with an organisation that invades privacy by phone hacking.
11 Apr 2012 11:41:07pm
Do you know how moronic your using the childish word "lefties"makes you sound? Kind of devalues anything you have to say.
12 Apr 2012 9:12:39am
Not as moronic and ill-informed as using terms such as 'denier' or 'denialist' to describe those who legitimately question the theory of CAGW.
John of WA:
11 Apr 2012 6:03:45pm
Between pay TV and ABC/SBS I don't watch the commercial channels much. I hadn't thought about that until now. What is really telling though is that I never tune in to the ABC News 24 service. If I want a quick browse of news I go to the pay site, flick and click. I don't know how much 24 costs but I'm getting no value from it, and I'm an ABC supporter.
12 Apr 2012 6:00:26am
Your comment is a non sequitur. You're saying you get your news largely via the Internet. So, do you use the ABC website? I guess your presence here answers that question...
John of WA:
12 Apr 2012 2:21:47pm
Er, wrong actually. I'm saying I go to Sky News... ie. pay TV site. ABC online existed before News24, which must cost quite a bit to run in comparison don't you think?
11 Apr 2012 6:08:24pm
Australian commercial TV stations are unwatchable, advertising content is so noisy, crude and frequent that watching anything on commercial TV is a nightmare. Movies are fragmented to a degree that destroys the intention of the movie's producers, its simply crude and careless. FOX USA is the model for this crass model of broadcasting.
Unfortunately this is what is happening to SBS. Not a good look for a public broadcaster.
I like my news unbiased, thats why I watch the ABC, I also draw news from a number of global sources, this is normal in an age of media and data convergence. In a Murdoch world you won't have that choice.
The ABC is a national public resource and process, to sell it off as some clowns suggest would be a breach of trust against a public that owns this resource.
11 Apr 2012 6:12:09pm
It is no use making statements along the lines of political preference at the ABC or bias as all these claims have been made and fended off for the past 30 odd years and nobody at the ABC seems to care.
For many years the ABC has (willingly) been used as a advertising conduit, mud thrower and apologist for the ALP (and sometimes for the Greens). Very rarely do you see a conservative line being pushed at the ABC. It employs few if any people with Conservative views and all the political, opinion and talk shows both TV and Radio are headed up by ex-ALP workers, representatives or supporters. The ABC clearly aligns itself with the BBC and mimics its left wing ideals.
ABC's employees wear their bias as a badge of honour and reflect on their attitudes with smugness and seeming immunity. If I was an incoming conservative government I would sell the ABC and put its services out to Public Tender. Not like the sort of - clearly biased - debacle that Conroy just completed but one that provided fairness and a true reflection on views by the ENTIRE taxpaying public of this country.
If the ABC cannot be truly representative of ALL Australian that pay taxes to support its upkeep then it should be dismantled or sold.
11 Apr 2012 7:41:15pm
Such claims have been ignored for 30 years because they have never had any basis in demonstrable fact.
Apparently you're upset the ABC hasn't 'pushed' your personal political philosophy. That's your problem.
Mark James:
11 Apr 2012 7:51:14pm
Mike, here's a little test. Get yourself a pen and paper and make a list of countries with strong public broadcasters. Then make a list of countries without strong public broadcasters. Now, put a little tick next to all the countries you'd be happy to live in, and then put a little cross in all the countries you wouldn't like to live in.
Do you notice anything?
hugh carnaby-sirius:
11 Apr 2012 11:17:14pm
Straight from the Tory book of rabid right rhetoric. Your claims of ABC left wing bias are so easily disproven by the article a day from the IPA on this site, the more than 20 conservative politicians who have written here (including Abbott and Reith), and the regular article from people like Kevin Donnelly.
Time for some truth serum.....
12 Apr 2012 11:09:46am
Maybe you should be the one taking truth serum.
Your claim of an article a day by the IPA is clearly false. Chris Berg writes one article per week, and Sinclair Davidson averages about one article per fornight with the odd other article by someone else thrown in here and there. That on average is about 1-2 articles per week. Just because articles from right-leaning journos, pollies and commentators appear on the Drum doesn't mean there is no left-wing bias. If you count the number of articles written by left-leaning commentators and those written by right-leaning commentators, you will find a clear bias in favour of the left. (BTW, only one article by Abbott has been posted here since June 2009.)
12 Apr 2012 3:50:39am
You clearly don't listen to ABC Local Radio if you think the ABC doesn't employ conservative political commentators. You'd be hard pressed to find a left-winger there.
If you had lived in the UK I doubt very much you'd say the BBC was left wing, either. We used to joke that the only reason the BBC was against the Iraq War was because it was Labour policy under Blair.
11 Apr 2012 6:38:57pm
I think that both regulation and public funding are needed to keep the standards of journalism high. We can't even hope to reach the standard and variety of journalism in larger countries like the US without it.
Arch Stanton:
11 Apr 2012 6:44:43pm
My sympathies Mr Dempster.
It seems that those of your career-length standing are like the old-timers at QANTAS (Air Sydney?), watching their institution losing its centre of excellence and becoming a shadow of its former self.
One minor quibble, accusing SBS of commercialism is pot calling the kettle black: ABC radio and television is full of advertisements for ABC Shop, books videos etc.. often by its own staff! Its a very big turn-off.
Unfortunately, I've come to realise that the ABC doesn't really exist for people like me: West Aussie; not educated in an elite private school (ala nearly every on-air presenter); average income, average job, middle aged single Christian (ie loser :) ).
It's one thing to be diverse and balanced and quite another where nearly every program is provocatively anti-Christian: eg Good Friday turn on telly Alan DeBotton (big fan of his work, have many of his books but, still, on Good Friday???); Easter Monday (Pell V Dawkins on Q&A how boringly risible and predictable that was..(I wonder how many scotches Tony Jones has after doing a show like that!) ; and a weekly diatribe on the Drum by a Philosopher who either doesn't understand basic concepts he's ridiculing, is being wilfully misleading and misrepresentative or perhaps just trolling for entertainment's sake. That column alone makes me question the integrity of all of ABC current affairs and RN which I dearly love..
Equally, like others have said, the manufactured conceit of commercial tv/radio newspapers don't offer me anything either.. and i shudder to think of Fairfax and 10 under Rinehart along with newscorp..
Looking for a media that genuinely informs and entertains not propagandises nor hectors.
re politics: I think the ABC is fairly balanced, its good to see right wing nutters on the drum, it gives them 'enough rope'.
Verge collection week coming up, maybe i'll throw the old telly out there.
That's my little rant, all better now :)
11 Apr 2012 6:50:58pm
Quentin, in my opinion Aunty & the SBS will be around for quite a while if commercial channels keep putting on crap.
emma peel:
11 Apr 2012 7:10:33pm
Thanks Quentin straight to the point or perhaps the jugular. Let's hope the new Chairman will bring some decisive improved leadership to Aunty. She has slipped. The challenges will be enormous with the new revolution.
And yes the gutter morality of our ex pat will have an historic effect on our press. The APC and self regulation has not worked to our benefit. I'm duly concerned that Gina & Clive are up to no good, well no good for the general well being of us- maybe for themselves and their cronies.
We need improved and more local content with the news, CA, arts and drama. I for one am sick of being dumbed down and a move to tabloid style content. I watch minimal TV but 90% is ABC, listen to Radio Nat 24 every other moment.
But I am enjoying Miss Slipper, fabulous costumes & props. Iview a great concept.
Good Luck!
Sunny - the real one:
11 Apr 2012 7:17:19pm
Quentin, you shine more than ever.
A million thanks for your courage and devotion!
The Cat:
11 Apr 2012 7:41:44pm
The next ABC chairman, the Honourable James Spigelman AC QC, will soon take his chair at the table and direct the ABC board through some troubled waters.
At the shallow end we need to wade though the Gillard government's 'convergence review' as the complexity of the 'the digital economy' approaches. Digital technology could change the way content is produced and presented to the public.
The Finkelstein inquiry's recommendation is also on the table with a new statutory regulator to be called the News Media Council. That Council is to be established by law to regulate print, radio and television. Print for the first time is to be regulated while the Federal government has regulated radio since the 1920s. With print, both the Australian Press Council and the UK Press Complaints Commission are voluntary 'self-regulation' entities.
11 Apr 2012 8:12:03pm
After a time working in NZ with their execrable "privatised" TV I used to come home and salivate at the terrific ABC and SBS channels. Back here now I usually only watch the 2 public ones apart from local news on commical. SBS has problems with their adverts, if we can afford to buy 30 billion for submarines, can't we afford a billion for decent public TV and radio?
11 Apr 2012 8:17:27pm
Since we (taxpayers) all pay for Your ABC, perhaps we could vote in (and out) the journalists on staff, to have some hope of a news filter that accurately reflects the political leanings of the electorate?
No? Too, um, democratic? But of course.
12 Apr 2012 7:10:37am
I'd far rather see it continue to reflect the whole spectrum of political views, as it does right now, rather than have it narrowed down to only reinforcing the views of the majority (however that varies from issue to issue).
What a MASSIVE research and polling effort that would be, to decide what those views are!!
And ... "a news filter"??? Sounds too much like "censorship" to me.
12 Apr 2012 7:57:38am
The point is it DOESN'T reflect the spectrum of political views now.
"News filter" meaning the prism through which the news is presented to us - currently predominantly left-wing. You might not see it as such because you view life through the same prism.
No research - just votes. Might be impractical but it's the only hope for balance in a lefty club paid for with all our taxes.
11 Apr 2012 8:19:53pm
The arrogence of your statement :" Rupert Murdoch is a disgrace" epitomises why ABC and other public broadcasters have lost support. I enjoy all media across the board-- right, left, news print, etc and am happy to pay for good journalism --but not for your blatant Labor promo machine. We simply watch it to track the spin-- and it is adding up to abysmal-- so who are YOU to label any one else in the media a disgrace!!!
11 Apr 2012 8:22:56pm
The only issue with the ABC is the left political bias.
11 Apr 2012 8:34:35pm
"ABC radio and television is full of advertisements for ABC Shop, books videos etc"
Quite right, I love the sanctimonious presenters on ABC Radio in Melbourne berating the pokie gambling industry, but come spring horse racing carnival, they are all over it .. what a giggle it is, they are having so much fun, presenting from the venues
a week after the event, back to finger wagging about gambling and pokies again
The ABC in Melbourne promotes horse racing and gambling, they absolutely love it and really get into the swing of it .. no advertising, the promoters couldn't pay for such good coverage!
David Nicholas:
11 Apr 2012 9:02:04pm
Well, Quentin, this was awful.
I was trying to figure out what this article was about. It's about several things but probably the real reason it appears for the piece is to lobby your political masters to keep things from changing and the current budget deliberations where the ABC is probably being discussed. So it goes.
I will save your claim about the US Constitution's first amendment about freedom of the press, for another time. Sufficed to say it only guarantees that the state will not close down printing presses printing material critical of the government.
It does not guarantee the right of a free press protection from lawsuits and class action cases about what is printed and more, it does not protect journalists from libel and slander lawsuits or from federal prosecution. There are several instances where the US Supreme Court and lower federal courts support what I have said. But that's for another time.
The ABC.
Coming from the US, there are two federally supported networks National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), as well as the public funding of community radio and televisions stations through the Corporation of Public Broadcasting. By comparison, the ABC from the outside looking in appears to be a humungous labyrinth of overlapping petty fiefdoms and personal bailiwicks, which just boggles the mind.
For example, you speak of ABC News and the move to bring many of its programs under the aegis of News24 and what that so-called centralizing will do for local and regional broadcasting is just so much bunk. To me centralizing makes sense. I see a lot of overlapping of effort and duplication of programming. How you justify it beats me.
I understand the seven 7:30 programs (each state having a Friday night edition) but I don't understand two separate midday news reports on ABC1 and News24 or Radio National and NewsRadio which duplicate many of the same news stories with different correspondents.
I want to understand how the ABC works and would dearly like to see a flow chart, which outlines how each area functions but I'm betting you can't do it no matter how many UK consultants you bring in. If I was Jim Spigelman thats what I would like to see: a flow chart with line item justifications of what each department does and who runs it.
Re: You comment about The Straits. I thought the death by jellyfish an interesting variation on a theme not to mention the native spirituality, which if you know something about such things made it a cut (sic) above other crime shows. On the other hand, the Julia Gillard comedy was pure sleaze.
The one thing I noticed after 33 years away is that the ABC had learnt how to make powerful enemies. If I was someone in control of the budget purse strings, I would take this piece as a shot across the bow.
12 Apr 2012 8:21:33am
NPR and PBS combined have produce very little given the overall size of the United States. They are examples of pathetic and ineffectual state media agencies running on a proven to fail business model of public/private funding.
There are many examples of editorial dereference especially within NPR with companies like Chevron being major funders of NPR and actively weeding out articles critical of it , whilst encouraging widespread condemnation of rival businesses.
You fail to mention, that Australia's private media ownership is some of the most concentrated outside of North Korea and you don't bother to pass comment on how this threatens the viability of our democracy.
Your criticism reads like the concerns of someone with a vested interest in one of the areas criticised in the article.
11 Apr 2012 9:11:28pm
So many hapless fools calling for the ABC to be scrapped or sold without for a second thinking of the wider consequences. Do you even understand how a diverse and free press is an essential part of a functioning democracy? Do you realise that the media's job is to hold governments and corporations to account? Do you realise that our privately own media is essentially run by a small handful of oligarchs? Oligarchs obsessed with a sick free market ideology that actively destroys investigative journalism and instead flood us with ill informed 'opinion' pieces that read like Stalinist era Pravda exposes. Oligarchs who don't give a damn about Australian sovereignty and in fact hate it and advocate a corporate dominated global government, in short, traitors.
The ABC is essentially the only Australian media organisation that trains and fields real correspondents/journalists, conducts thorough investigation of government policy and it's implications and also provides some semi intelligent recreational as well as Children's services.
If you truly hate democracy and want to expand the kleptocracy, then fine, call for the end of the ABC and the subsequent media duopoly and death of investigative journalism and media diversity. But this blind and idiotic ideological founded obsession that the ABC is some kind of haven for communists is a delusional conspiracy parroted by morons.
The ABC is about the last asset this nation hasn't flogged off to the global corporatocracy.
11 Apr 2012 9:19:54pm
Mark Scott's baby, News 24, is killing the ABC.
A channel nobody watches sucking the ABC dry.
11 Apr 2012 9:21:30pm
Sell it...save it, too far left...too far right.
I've just browsed the comments. Seems the ABC is doing it's job. Long may it continue.
11 Apr 2012 9:28:37pm
Journalists and the media it general have brought regulation on their heads by their own actions, but in any case, you only have to look to the GFC to see the result of light-touch self-regulation - it doesn't work and never has. If you then add journalists' ludicrous claim to professional status, and compare it to their usual low-rent performance, you have a trade crying out for the imposition of some standards.
11 Apr 2012 9:29:58pm
Let every one have their say ,the majority of Australian's will make up their own mines,and any opinion will be judged for what it is,rubbish,propaganda,or bullsh.t.So don't underestimate the people that are your neighbors or friends we have see it all before.If you think 72% of Queensland voter were wrong,you are a bigger fool than this federal government.
12 Apr 2012 8:10:56am
So the 'Queensland voter', no doubt a highly educated and politically astute creature, should be deciding the fate of the ABC? Sorry to be rude but I think you just made a great case for the importance of the ABC. It is to prevent Australia becoming a nation of poorly informed, ideologically rigid and easily influenced 'Queensland voters' who have ultimately suffered from a complete lack of credible media diversity.
How many 'Queensland voters' can tell you about Campbell Newman's education policy? or his infrastructure vision for 2020? Probably less than 15% I would imagine. Voting without an informed population assisted by an accessible and critical media is a worthless activity.
Having a well functioning and diverse media isn't a game or competition like the way you perceive democracy. It's an insurance policy, a safeguard against descent into totalitarian rule. I think the 'Queensland voter' needs to go and watch/listen/read a bit more ABC rather than necking XXXX's and voting in new governments with identical policy agenda's and policies to the one they just voted out.
12 Apr 2012 9:10:31am
Too true Budovski. And don't forget the other "skill" required from voters in this country (according to well informed right-wing sources): baseball bats juggling!... Very important.
11 Apr 2012 10:25:36pm
Quentin desperately needs a reality check - yes, exposure to the real world.
For everyone that holds the view that Murdoch is biased, there would appear an equal number who believe the ABC and other outlets are equally biased in the other direction.
Each government always complains that the media is biased however it is this labor govt that has squealed the loudest and put in place a commission to gets it way.
The more that the govt complained about the Kevin Rudd challenge, the more it amplified its hypocracy when Kevin came clean.
The more occasions that PM Gillard publicly supports Craig Thompson, the more hypocritical the government becomes.
There is not an ounce of truth that Australian Murdoch press share any of the appalling habits of the British tabloid.
Those in Australia who are being rightly exposed as incompetent are the loudest complainants.
There is no
11 Apr 2012 11:02:52pm
Thanks Quentin for this.
I hope it is not too late.
Who could blame Swan for defunding the ABC this budget. Whilst ABC should not be a friend of the government it certainly should not be looking to The Australian for it's cues to bash the govt, gloss over opposition policy/funding shortfalls, distort climate science and policies to address it etc etc.
Once upon a time I would've defended the ABC passionately - now, I don't care.
I think the last straw was the anti vaccination mob being asked to provide balance science on a possible new strain of pertussis. I wasn't surprised as I've seen the climate science getting a work over by the IPA here.
Just a couple of days ago an "environment reporter" Mr Duffy claimed that there's IPA one end and CSIRO the other and he's providing balance inbetween flat and round Earth. Every day now it's carbon tax this and tax that - less than 2 years ago, the ABC would have explained the difference between an ETS and a tax.
I don't know if we can swing this around Quentin. If you reckon Spigelman can then I'm all for it.
If not, flog it if you can - the mystery backers of the IPA might be willing to pay for what they get for free now.
12 Apr 2012 9:42:45am
My (and many,many others) sentiments exactly.
We are silenced now that the ABC is mute and mono-directional.
If it cannot even see, let alone question, the opposition, I can only presume corruption or ineptitude.
As other commenters have duly noted, keeping the ABC 24 channel running non-stop, is NOT value for money.
Imagine Sunrise doing the same.
Nauseating thought,isn't it?(And they have ads to pay their way)
Fix it or flog it.
12 Apr 2012 12:22:32am
The ABC, and SBS are a significant part of Australian culture. I have derived miles of pleasure from listening and viewing since I was a young boy, from sport to drama,the best news in the country and current affairs and many iconic comedy programs. This site is brilliant. How lousy and ridiculous can Canberra get on this?
It would cost $2.50/yr/ person to eliminate ads from SBS, golly that'll help balance the books, no need to factor in quality, just keep on quantifying everything.
Time to revisit www.aph.gov.au and draft a few e-mails.
That's www.aph.gov.au, open 24/7 for your lobbying convenience.
HANDS OFF THE ABC!!!!............ www.aph.gov.au
Joe Blow:
12 Apr 2012 12:43:49am
We need the ABC. It's as simple as that. We could have a thousand other commercial broadcasters and they would still be clones of each other, driven by the lowest common denominator market to advertisement-ridden drivel. The only things I don't really like on the ABC tend to be the changes forced upon it in the last decade by exactly those commercial influences. We need quality journalism, quality local content, quality children's programs, quality documentaries... experience suggests that only the ABC is capable of providing these. Now if you are happy to watch A Current Affair for your news analysis I'm afraid you are just going to have to put up with spending your 8c a day for the benefit of other Australians who appreciate it. But since I never go to sporting events, and rarely get to see most of the other tax-funded "events" around the country, my taxes that pay for sports arenas and suchlike can compensate you.
12 Apr 2012 6:06:48am
An interesting piece Quentin.
Some very valid points but also a lot of long term ABC staffer thinking.
Staff at the ABC seem to struggle with new ideas and fresh blood. Sometimes that fresh blood stuffs up. Sometimes it makes changes that are fundamental to an organisation's survival. Sometimes the report card takes a long while to write.
Thanks for your contribution and to giving the debate a kick along ... now it is time for some serious critical thinking.
12 Apr 2012 6:15:37am
A post script ... you trumpet the importance of State based news.
I simply ask, why on earth do we bother?
Surely it is time for one national bulletin. SBS does it well - why not the ABC?
Don't get me wrong. I will not watch commercial news bulletins. I am not interested in trivial and parochial local "stories" ... the ABC does much better than that - but it can do even better and devote the resources saved to more productive areas.
And while you are at dump the ridiculous state based Friday 7.30's. You have my attention Monday to Thursday ...but on Friday, you lose me.
12 Apr 2012 6:18:51am
Mr Dempster has produced an excellent article. Both the ABC and SBS boards were stacked during the Howard years, and both continue to groan under the weight of their incompetence. The decision to allow advertising on SBS was a disgrace.The ABC has maintained a reasonable news service (apart from the egregious Ulhlmann and the 7.30 Report) and has some of the best and fairest journalists in Australia with a good spread of opinion. But its drama output is pathetic, there is nothing of any real content on TV or Radio for intelligent adolescents, the hours of "Rage" are just an extended commercial and could easily be condensed into about an hour, and if most local capital city radio and JJJ cannot be dramatically improved there is probably not much point in maintaining them. Incidentally, to those silly whingers who bang on and on about the ABC being left-wing, my father, a lifelong member of the Liberal Party, was a Regional Manager and was continually accused by rightwing ferals of showing his "left-wing bias". After doing extended interviews with Aboriginals he was accused of being a "nigger lover" and after an extended coverage of a local abbatoir he was accused of being a "veggie-green", and received death threats. Honest and fearless journalism and even provocative and challenging journalism is something we should cherish in this country, and the ABC is its last Australian bastian. Finally Mr Dempster is correct in pointing the finger at Rupert Murdoch who has trashed journalism and helped spew the gutter coverage we see on populist radio and in the junk press.
12 Apr 2012 6:40:05am
The first thing I would do if put in charge of the ABC would be to get rid of Mark Scott, appoint someone who wants the ABC to follow its charter & serve the people, and close down the poorly-rating News 24. The drop in quality of most programs on ABC1 seems to have rapidly accelerated at about the same time as massive funds were diverted to set up a 24 hour news channel that (according to the ratings) next-to-nobody bothers watching. I am getting so tired of seeing el-cheapo BBC reality & house renovation shows on at prime time, when they should be lightweight Summer holiday fillers. Science has almost completely disappeared from ABC1, and there is very little else that gets the viewer actively thinking. The once-respected 7:30 has become a show where the poorly-researched interviewer repeats the same question 20 times in the hope of catching the interviewee out, and important questions are skipped over. Very rarely do news reports the next day have a story about something important said in an interview on the ABC the night before. And please - stop the advertising. This week 702 local radio spent nearly 2 afternoon hours promoting the iPhone and apps, which have to be paid for. I think the ABC can do better than fill in hours of prime radio time by having people call in & advise what games they like to play on their $600+ phone. Many reports on the news, especially medical stories, often are little more than public relations for certain drug companies or private medical facilities. I just find that I am switching the ABC off more & more these days, because I can't differentiate it from the commercial TV & radio stations any more. It is sad to see one of the greatest public-owned broadcasters being destroyed through cutbacks & poor programming decisions. Cut the cheap commercialism, and bring back some quality to the ABC's programming.
The Viking:
12 Apr 2012 7:10:12am
I have no doubt like all former Chairpersons as much they want to reform the ABC the culture of anti conservative pro ALP/Green news and opinion will continue unabated.
If you want some insight into the ABC culture read retiring board member anthropologist Dr Ron Brunton's comment's here: http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/wp-content/uploads/siq/SIQ33.pdf
Bruce James:
12 Apr 2012 7:13:03am
That Rupert Murdoch was an Australian makes me ashamed, as under his direction, his media world-wide has sullied the reputation of fair journalism.
There is no question that his papers' reporting of politics is obviously biased in every country of operation, curiously aligned with his personal desires for conservative governments aligned to big business.
For a foretaste of how much worse it could get in Australia, tune in to FOX NEWS on cable TV. Even the most ardent Australian conservatives must cringe at the standards of political "reporting" there.
What can the average Australian do about this?
12 Apr 2012 7:20:11am
For a change management practioner, there are people that present a huge challenge - a classic dilemma.
An indvidual with a lot to offer, influential, been around for a long while and made a solid contribution.
They sometimes turn into their own worst enemies. Unable to accept change or even acknowledge the need for change. They know the right way to do things and that is the way it has always been done; the way their mentors and those they respect did it. In other words, they know the answers and wonder why no one is listening to them.
Good management seeks to bring them along and to get the best out of them - for a time. When they become disruptive and their influence is a brake to necessary change they must be moved on - well at least in the private sector - and maybe in the new world facing the ABC
12 Apr 2012 8:52:18am
There is actually life at The Drum and the ABC.
Well said Quentin. Very well said. I haven't seen so much CAPS LOCK in a long time and using the word 'already' twice in one sentence shows how passionate you are about OUR ABC.
God help us all though if (yes IF) Tiny Abbot and Big Joe Hockey get their hands on the purse strings.
I wonder what you mean by "other deserving demands on the public purse."? Is that "demands" like all the corporate welfare given to the likes of Twiggy, Gina and Clive? Or the demands of the corporate welfare apportioned to BHP and Rio?
The ABC And SBS can easily be funded to fulfil their very important roles in Australian society, but as long as the government prioritises the millions for the mining moguls over the people and the fabric of culture and society, things do indeed look bleak.
12 Apr 2012 10:27:09am
Love SBS and The ABC for showing The Killing, Spooks,Insiders (warts and all) Q&I (warts and all) and 7.30.
As for left & right I don't go looking,so please bugger off and leave well alone
Mike Clayfield:
12 Apr 2012 10:44:56am
An entertaining read Quentin. But be careful what you wish for, imposition of more control and regulation of News Ltd will undoubtably be also applied to the ABC/SBS/Fairfax and anyone else who has the temerity to practise journalism.
As an example - the proposed News Media Council could have been used by APEA to have mandated corrections in the misleading and factually incorrect ABC web site about CSG.
As long as the publicly funded broadcasters are profesional and balanced in their coverage then they will continue to have community support. If not - we can expect that the public can raise some questions about this.
12 Apr 2012 10:59:46am
I'm amazed that someone having worked for a Labor politician half a lifetime ago apparently means that they are forever supportive of Labor politics.
A regular ultra-conservative on Insiders is Piers Akerman - rude, boorish, intolerant. At least Andrew Bolt was polite most of the time. Incidentally, the program is just called Insiders, NOT The Insiders. Barrie Cassidy recently answered complaints about the number of Labor politicians in the interview segment by noting that no Libs had accepted invitations to appear. The following week Scott Morrison showed up. Strangely, Tony Abbott only seems to agree to interviews when he knows his ego will be stroked, which is why Bolt, Jones and the like see him more often.
As for Murdoch: I started reading The Australian from its first issue in 1964. Increasingly angry at its blatant conservative stance, I finally stopped buying it about a year ago, although I still get the Saturday one for its excellent review supplement - the rest goes to recycling.
I support those contributors who've asked for the hard evidence of the ABC's left-wingness. I know it's Liberal Party dogma, but that's all it is.
12 Apr 2012 11:07:23am
Firstly I've long ago dismissed those who think that the ABC is by lefties for lefties as complete morons. Yes morons.
Public broadcasting definitely has a place. I'm currently living in NZ, and public broadcasting is woeful in NZ. Tread very wearily in commercialising public broadcasters. If you think SBS has got bad, you should see what TVNZ serves up. Rubbish from start to finish with almost no local content.
I get Australia Network and SBS 1 and 2 on satellite. All three are definitely way, way better than what's on offer locally. I also enjoy NHK and Arirang from Japan and Korea respectively. The ads are few and far between on all of them.
Best advice to anyone is to whack up a satellite dish or three.
Rick :
12 Apr 2012 12:16:25pm
Long may the ABC continue. It just needs to be funded adequately.
As a listener to 702 radio I am left wondering why that station is always drawing upon non ABC journalists for comment on the news. The Richard Glover program in particular regularly has Fairfax and News journalists to discuss topical matters. Presumably they don't do it for nothing and are paid appearance money. If so then this is surely a waste of funds as the ABC has a great number of paid employees who, as equally qualified journalists, could do exactly the same job just as efficiently.
Comments for this story are closed.