This week’s Morgan face-to-face poll has Labor’s lead down to 58.5-41.5 from 63-37 last week, its weakest Morgan face-to-face showing since the election of the Rudd government. It seems Morgan also conducted a phone poll between June 4-9 which put the score at 56-44, compared with the government’s previous weakest result of 58-42 at the phone poll of May 7-11.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Morgan: 58.5-41.5
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
256 Comments
What a disasterous poll for Labor. LOL
Who would have thought that 6 months into the Rudd government, 44 was the HIGHEST that the opposition could score. Impressive indeed.
Troy Buswell sacks Rob Johnston from Shadow Cabinet.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/13/2274128.htm
This just puts Morgan into line with the last Newspoll.
I’ve got to agree with what my good mate Fagin said in the earlier thread: Iemma is indeed a gutless tool, even the Chair Sniffer from WA has more balls?
I think we can finally conlude that the electorate will always be a sucker for clever politics over clever policy.
So who’s up for a carbon tax on petrol?
Disagree Progressive, maybe we should go back to the US thread!! Regardless of Iemma or NSW ALP’s faults, which appear to be many although I am in Vic so I dont know enough about it, I think the standing down is a sensible response to an incident that is highly debatable
The previous one at 63-37 did seem a little high considering what had happened the previous fortnight. This one taken last weekend would not have taken in Rudd’s Japan visit.
Hell of a lot more encouragment for Lab than Lib. They still cannot make the grade despite everything. Newspoll will be interesting next week but they are governing for another 2.5 years and a blip(even a little one) now and again means nothing.
Despite being one of those wanting action on DellaBosca/Neil, I am happy with the “mere” standing aside on Iguanagate. There are conflicting claims and it is still subject to police investigation so suspension pending the outcome is appropriate. Doing nothing was not.
A 3.5% change is outside the MOE so should be regarded as significant IF IT PERSISTS. The polls are volatile at the moment and any shift one way is promptly followed by a shift in the opposite direction
Progressive – you sound a bit like Brandis last night on ABC – he was wanting to be judge jury and executioner – all on the basis of hearsay ! That is all it is at the moment, with stats decs witnessed by a lib.
Due course….just allow a bit of due course. Its in the hands of the cops – let them do whatever they need to do. In the meantime Della Bosco HAS stepped aside (or pushed – same outcome.)
The chair sniffer in WA sacks a rival/ opponent – so what, just another case of political bloodletting imho.
Do the libs REALLY see the chair sniffer as remotely electable ?? Really ?
Possum has a great idea up and running. Sorry if someone has already mentioned this here.
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2008/06/12/your-thoughts-about-a-possums-podium/#comments
Agree Dave, I dont understand the urgency and degree of concern about this incident. Why would normally rational bloggers like Prog get so riled up about an incident in a restaurant where the circumstances are less than clear?? I dont get it
I wish to clarify- havent the stat decs signed by a JP that is a Lib staffer BEEN WITHDRAWN?? If so, why are they still being regarded as evidence??
I believe that as the declarations are legal documents you cannot just withdraw them. It would be like giving evidence in court and then saying ‘you know what, perhaps it wasn’t like that, i don’t really know, just leave me out of this.’ It doesn’t quite work like that.
I believe this is the main question for the police, with conflicting stat decs from both sides, one side has legally lied. It’s a question of which side is playing sillybuggers.
Re: Progressive and Andrew and Iguanagate.
What you don’t understand about Della Bosca it that it is no longer a matter relating to rudeness or threats made in a restaurant. It is now about a coverup.
Della Bosca got Iemma to stand by him on Tuesday on the basis of an apology letter from Iguanas. Iemma referred to the letter several times as a reason why he supported Della.
It now turns out Della Bosca drafted the apology himself. Worse still he (or his office) lied about it when questioned by Macquarie Radio and the SMH yesterday. What is amazing is that Iemma still does not have the balls to sack him
It is great to see Jim Lloyd as the Member for Robertson again.
It is always the cover up that is the real scandal. A far smarter move would have been just to say when the story broke that the other parties were just publicy seeking. Although there is no clear evidence of a cover up, just the suggestion there might have been one.
The rest of the story is rubbish. Soccer girl saw her chance of a bit of cash and gave her story, but there was no real crime. Others who come out of the woodwork to tell how much of a bitch Belinda are not telling anyone anything they don’t all ready know. And Sophie Mirabella’s baby may or may not be a devil child but having Sophie as a mum might not help.
The original incident isn’t the thing that’s got Della Bosca and his wife into hot water, it’s the subsequent attempt to brush it under the carpet!
I’m fine with letting the police investigate the matter, if Della Vosca is innocent, by all means reinstate him to Iemma’s ministry!
And, who said I’m a rational blogger? You obviously haven’t read the U.S politics threads on this site LOL
Whilst I still believe this is a beat-up, its really hard to believe that Della Bosca was stupid enough to draft the apology himself. Surely any politician worth their salt could have forseen the trouble that might cause??
In the last eight Morgan polls the large disparity between the Phone and Face-to-Face results brings into question the accuracy of both. The Face to Face has been consistently higher than the Phone, which makes one wonder how the questions are put in Face-to-Face.
This result, Face-to-Face of 58.5/41.5 is closer to the last Newspoll, 57/43, and is therefore probably nearer the mark. The last Face-to-Face two weeks ago of 63/37 looked like a wild outlier that if replicated at an election would virtually wipe out the Coalition. So it was never believable.
If Dennis Shanahan does comment (which is unlikely being a Morgan poll), no doubt he will see this result as foretelling impending disaster for the Government, the gap having narrowed to just 17 points.
The Morgan poll was taken last weekend after a difficult week for the Government. Next Tuesday’s Newspoll, which will be taken this coming weekend, might be an interesting reflection on Kevin Rudd’s visit to Japan and Indonesia.
And even more stupid not tell Iemma
The CourierMail decides to launch an attack that backfires.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/ipswich-motorway-report-completely-wrong/2008/06/13/1213321580304.html
22 – It is not as if Iemma doesn’t have his own problems either.
Has anyone been to Iguana Joe’s? Sounds a little “Kath & Kim”ish to me.
A Current Affair found not to be fairly representing views again.
“This is the fifth time since 2005 that ACMA has upheld a complaint about the tabloid current affairs program’s failure to represent views fairly…”
“Nine responded that it had conducted “intensive training with A Current Affair reporters and producers” about ACMA’s latest finding as well as the previous four on the same issue.”
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/articles/2008/06/12/1213283196702.html
The whole business of Della Bosca and Belinda Neal is strange. Why would staff members withdraw a stautary declaration? Irespective of whether the allegations are true or untrue withdrawing them is an admission of a legal lie. Why would the staff do that? It makes no sense.
If Bosca wrote the apology the staff still signed it. They did not have to sign it (no one was “pointing a gun at their head”)but in doing so they took full responsibility for it. In a sense it makes no difference who composed the wording.
If Bosca threatened legal action then he is only exercising his right as a citizen. He is entitled to do this. Maybe they thought the original statemnents would not stand up to the legal process and it was the least of the evils to withdraw them straight away rather than let everything go too far and be tested in court.
There are too many if’s and maybe’s. The whole thing does not string together right. The situation is in the right hands at present- being investigated by police.
A lot of the talk in the Media is just speculation at the moment with the reporter’s slant.
Who wrote the original allegations- did the nameless Lib staffer who apparently was a JP have a hand in it? Who knows? –Another if or maybe!
This poll can only be good for Labor as far as its long term prospects for the next election are concerned.
No, it’s no spin, it’s true!
Why?
Because these sort of numbers are going to ensure that Brenda stays on as leader for longer, Turnbull will spit the dummy, and most importantly of all, Cossie may be more inclined to chuck it in.
Remember, let’s go easy on Brenda lol.
My previous bleating about the MSM reporting of political happenings, and specifically, the reporting by the ABC, is connected to the creation of perception, and I’ve got to say, ABC didn’t disappoint tonight. On ABC TV News tonight, I proffer the reporting of David Hicks having pleaded guilty, simply repeated from other sources, in relation to the U.S. Fed. Court ruling on the status of prisoners in Gitmo Bay. I also proffer the reporting of the schemozzle in Indonesia on PM as somehow being Rudd’s fault. This is about the creation of perception, and I would argue, the manipulation of the public. Antonio and Stuart may complain about the level of complaint about the functioning of the so-called fourth estate, but in my view, there’s little balance evident, and much continuing and cumulative evidence of, either extraordinary laziness or deliberate mischief, though I will concede pressure to produce vs. resources to do so. I would have thought that being attuned to what is reported and how it is reported would be of intense political interest?
27 – Plus there is a greater chance that the Libs will think it will be okay to risk a double dissolution.
Also more funny business by the Chair Sniffer in the West: http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/buswell-sacking-action-remarkable-carpenter-20080613-2pyd.html
Chalk up another lose to Liberals there.
With the Dela Bosca and Neale incident, I certainly do not want to go to their defence. But I will say this, if they had gone out to a privately owned restaurant none of this would have happened.
Restaurant proprietors treat their customers with decency and respect. A far cry from most clubs and pubs who are disrespectful, are offensive bullies and stand over you, and stick together (the staff) if there are any disputes.
Doug @26: spot on.
Queensland Labor also was hit between the eyes with a letter from the National Member for Burnett to the Criminal Misconduct Commission.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/06/13/a-rose-by-any-other-name/
theres something a bit off in the Della Boscagate, i can’t get past the lib staffer conveniently being there to witness the whole thing and to be able to issue and take sworn statements immediatly, even the soccer girl, she had a couple of faint marks yet she dramatically claimed she was’nt sure if she’d been damaged for life, i must admit i burst out laughing when she came out with that–why on earth was she playing soccer if a couple of faint bruises has her disabled for life? c’mon ive got bigger bruises than that from knocking my leg against the desk when i get up, we know from the phamplet sting that the libs dont mind a bit of a set up, at the time just before the election, a couple of witnesses claimed it was’nt the first time, it’s all a bit too convenient for me,the Della Boscas certainly havent handled it very well but that still does’nt make him or her guilty, i’m just a bit uncomfortable with the whole thing, hmm, maybe the police can sort it out.
Stateline NSW had a round up of the whole weeks coverage concerning the big wazoo surrounding Bosca, Neale etc starting with the story in last Sunday’s Terror. It included some questions still yet to be answered by the Liberals at the end that are interesting.
Overall it came across as a story that blew way out of proportions thanks to Bosca not being as open at the first press conference on the Sunday as he could have been. It really didn’t need to and shouldn’t have come to this.
(Not sure when the transcript will be on the the Stateline NSW website.)
Harry at #28
I am not sure what you are referring to in relation to Indonesia.
However, my understanding is that David Hicks did plead guilty. This may certainly have been part of a “plea bargain” (ie. plead guilty and we will repatriate you to Australia) but he did plead guilty. I do not think this qualifies as MSM bias. It is merely the statement of a fact.
Re Judy Barnes at #33
As a liberal supporter, I am amazed that the ALP has not made more of Hartcher’s involvement. Hartcher has been particularly quiet.
It actually reassures me. Hartcher is apparently hard right (part of David Clarkes clique – great alliteration) and they are known for their ambivilence towards O’Farrell. Maybe the Liberals are finally pulling on the same oar.
This bodes well for the next state election.
35 “I am not sure what you are referring to in relation to Indonesia.”
Stuart, video is here:
‘Rudd, Yudhoyono questioned over travel warning’
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/
Stuart see also
‘Translator causes confusion over travel warning’
Harry – yeah I got the same impression that abc news were implying the indonesian “slip” was somehow Rudds fault.
Seems to be that pattern with abc’s reporting of late, a la Cassidy last week. We expect it of the other msm reptiles but expect better from aunty.
Its getting to the stage that if Rudd walked across sydney harbour, the headline would be “RUDD CAN’T SWIM”
With parliament back next week it will be more of the same
If we could get a copy of SBY quote without the translation we could get an idea of what he says. But I can’t here what he said. I am sure someone in the media will get a copy from the Indonesian media and then we will know.
40 BSF, an explanation is here.
http://indosnesos.blogspot.com/2008/06/australian-pm-rudds-day-lost-in.html
stuart, while i’m a strong laborite i want to see good oppositions to keep the governments on their toes,HOWEVER i want honest oppositions who are strong on their merits and not for pulling shonkeys with the aid of their media mates, ive seen too much of those neat little tricks in the past, maybe i’m wrong, but this hooha just doesnt feel right, if it is a set up i can only hope one of the staff will break down and tell the police, if their cops are anything like SAPOL they’ll be sniffing around for rats.
don’t take this as supporting the Della Bosca’s i’d just like to know the truth,either they or newsltd is going to end up with a huge egg omelet on their faces, another thing that disturbs me is the opposition screaming for them to be sacked before the police investigation is complete, the three libs in Queensland didnt get sacked while they were being investigated last year and it was for much, much more serious offences than this beat up.
Spot on Judy.
Here goes ABC again pushing Brenda’s agenda for next week’s parliment for him
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/13/2274353.htm
Nelson accuses Rudd of softening whaling stance
“Mr Rudd said that he was going to take the Japanese and the Japanese whalers to the international courts and he’s now decided that he won’t be doing that.”
The fact that it’s BS and Kev has said he hasn’t changed his mind on whaling and that if diplomacy fails and after Garrett attends Internation Whaling Commission meeting in Chile in a fortnight ,the courts are still an option doesn’t get a mention by #%#* ABC!
A poll last week said 90% want Japan taken to court over whaling
Brenda’s big issue for QT “Rudd soft on Japan etc”
Now where have we seen all this before???
Poll do pensioners & carers need more help
topic pushed by msm to be used by Libs in QT as the issue of the week
Poll is petrol too dear
topic pushed by msm to be used by Libs in QT as the issue of the week
Is it just me or is their predicibility (Libs and media) becoming ridiculous?
Vera, you’re a knucklehead and you truly have no idea what you’re talking about. What do you want the reporter to do. Not report what Brendan Nelson has to say? Do you think journalists should censor what’s said at press conferences or written in press releases. Why are you so sure that what he says is BS? Can you honestly say you know everything Kevin Rudd and Peter Garrett have said on whaling in the last 6 months, because I’m sure as hell the reporter writing the story couldn’t tell you. Just put yourself in the position of a Canberra reporter, deluged from sun-up to midnight by press releases, reports, media feeds, day in day out, and ask then to know everything said in the last six months on every topic.
If you want that sort of analysis, you will not, not, not, not get it in an on-line news service done on an hourly turn around basis. It’s always written by the youngest, most in-experienced and lowest paid journalists. The ones with more experience are doing newspapers, radio or television.
It’s very easy for you to sit in an on-line blog and whinge that you know better, but from what you’ve written in the last day or two, I’m absolutely certain that you don’t know better.
It does seem to be open season on the ALP government.
Not that there aren’t criticisms to be made, but most of them are just beat ups. Why is the media doing it? Are they just bored?
45 says
“you’re a knucklehead and you truly have no idea what you’re talking about”
Knucklehead aye?
bit touchy there aren’t you fella, as others have said we all have our opinions and are entiltled to them
Oh! sorry ABC doesn’t work like that does it lol!
Vera
News services have to report what politicians say, if they ignore them they would be accused of bias.
One of the complaints about Howard was his supposed suppression of free speech highlighted in the excellent article by David Marr “Careful he might hear you”
Now we have a media criticising the government, often justified, and people complain they are biased?
Plenty of pro labor articles if you look for them.
Antony 45
Rudd has said at least twice in the last week that he would try Diplomacy first and go to the Courts as the second resort over whaling. He said it on Ch.10 last Sunday and this week in Japan at the Press Club to both Japanese and Australian journalists. He is not softening his stance and his strategy makes sense seeing that Japan is a friend. I know this and I am just an interested by-stander. Why does not Nelson know this? What he said is BS as Vera says. Fair enough the on – line may be reporting verbatim what people say without criticism, but if they are without bias they should follow this process everytime.
It is not on -line ABC I am concerned so much as the TV bulletins.
It does seem to be open season on the Labor Gov’t in all MSM at the moment and while I can speculate the reason I don’t really know it. Can you enlighten us?
Labor vs Liberal; Carlton vs Collingwood, they are both manifestations of the same tribal loyalties. I am not from NSW but I must admit I see the Della Bosca/Neal episode and the reactions posted here as another game where supporters and denigrators do so on the basis of the TEAM.
Let’s get real there is smoke here and very smelly smoke indeed. The last thing we need are arrogant politicians expressing that arrogance in either their private or public lives.
Apologists do nothing but encourage our politicians to more extreme behaviour. We have recent examples of the most heinous behaviour by politicians and we do not learn.
Labor politicians are becoming arrogant to the extreme across the country and we continue to defend them.
We get the politicians we deserve be careful you are not defending those who should not be defended because they wear your guernsey.
Kevin Rudd has been soundly condemned by Nelson and others for putting forward a “poorly thought” out plan for a broader SE Asia body, similar to the EEC which they contend is rejected by SE Asia leaders.
Not according to this report by the ABC.
{Speaking after a meeting in Jakarta, ASEAN secretary general Surin Pitsuwan said he welcomed Mr Rudd’s vision for Asia and wanted ASEAN to become involved with it.
“ASEAN has its central role – ASEAN is hoping – in the core of the evolution of many architectures in the region,” he said.
“But essentially every member state in the region are looking forward to a firmer and more integrated framework of cooperation.”
Mr Surin says the plan it is a natural next step for the region.}
And Indonesia!
{However, a spokesman for Indonesia’s foreign ministry said last week that Jakarta was “really keen” to examine the plan.}
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/13/2274584.htm?section=justin
stuart # 35. My observation is that the ABC News Online, sometimes the News both TV and Radio, simply reproduce what has been reported elsewhere, virtually word for word. As I’ve said before, it may be due to resources, or laziness or mischief, but it makes for a sad state of affairs for the fourth estate and therefore, how the population is informed.
Antony, it may well be that some of us are ill informed about how online news services operate. If it’s the case the online service is operated by the most junior and poorly paid, and Antonio has previously had some illuminating things to say about this, I’d argue that it probably needs to be experienced and well paid people who provide this service, particularly if radio and TV news is relying on them as a front line “Triage” for filtering and focus. I hope I’ve understood this correctly?
From the ABC News Website.
Most likely, they’re just taking what’s off the wire services and just repotising it holus bolus, along with scripts from Radio News etc.
In the Olden Days it was known as “Rip n’ Read.
colin # 51. While I’m from Victoria, and therefore not as across the functioning of the N.S.W. gov’t as I might be, they certainly look and sound to me like a very dysfunctional mob, and that’s taking into account my whinging about the fourth estate.
Tribes notwithstanding, and I’ve been fairly upfront about my persuasions, but if a gov’t is not performing, or is corrupt, or incompetent, I want to know about it, and will be actively critical.
Frank # 54. Yep, I understand that for overseas news, but simply think that reports could be framed as e.g., ”Reuters report that blah, blah”, as a more accurate way of assigning source. I’m more critical of the reporting of whatever anyone has said, as a stenographic exercise, as Bushfire Bill has described it.
What is with the Italian surnames in the NSW Labor Party..Della Bosca..Tripodi..Costa..and Iemma …..what does it all mean??
Oh for the says when Australian politics were the preserve of leaders with Good Old Ossie Names like Santamaria!
Harry “Snapper” Organs at # 55
I will be pleased to read your comments about the Vic political scene.
Dear ‘The Godfather”
Me thinks relied too much on your spell checker!
Colin
Looking over the Blogs I do not see too many people defending Della Bosca/Neal but I do see a few people questioning the accounts of what has happened. You are right in saying there is smoke, but the question is where is the smoke coming from? It could be coming from both sides(most likely) or from one side or the other.
But the events are not clear because of the conflicting accounts and what people have signed and retracted.
If this thing has to be done to death lets have the truth, and not just listen to media hype.
Police are investigating.
That was a sweeping statement re Labor politicians. I wonder who you had in mind or was that you just baracking for your own team?
Amazing developments in the handling of the Nationals referral of a letter to the CMC yesterday.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23859955-952,00.html
OOPS – looks like The Australian has got a bit ahead of itself with the recent proposed redistribution. The one remaining One Nation member in the Queensland Parliament is the Member for Tablelands until after the next election under the proposed new boundaries.
After that the Member for Nanango will be the last remaining former One Nation member in the Queensland Parliament if she is re elected.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23861134-5006786,00.html
Looking at it more closely, it is the first paragraph of this quote that is incorrect and in conflict with the third paragraph. The third paragraph is correct.
There is no conflict steve.
Pratt is the only surviving member of the 11 One Nation candidates elected in 1998. Fact.
The original One Nation member for Tablelands defected and Rosa Lee Long took the seat as the new One Nation candidate in 2001.
Antony Green
The problem with the ABC at the moment is that some sectors are trying to out trivialize the commercial sector.
I love radio national, and news radio is a good listen but 774, what a complete waste of tax payers money. Ok you don’t get commercials but it still just drivel.
And when it comes to political drivel instead of informed debate on issues ( which radio national seems to be able to manage) you in my view have to expect people to complain.
44 & 45
That reporter could have checked what Mr Rudd had actually said
Doug #60
Della Bosca was in the way of Gillard-Iemma’s plans to break with the unions in NSW and hand over IR to Canberra. That’s why he and Neal were sorted out. It’s a political stitch-up of the NSW Right. Fun to watch!
Piping
I’ve also heard it was because Bosca is opposed to the power sell off and is leading the opposition against it.?
Roman Catholic cuckold, Tony Abbott and cuckolder, the blessed Grenadine Doogue, were on ABCRN this morning discussing the impeding invasion of our southern secular Sodom by former Hitler Youth member, ould Red Socks, and it seems a huge number of faithful peach bottomed boys and nubile young women from all over Australia and the known universe.
A lot of the discussion was incomprehensible to anyone living in the 21st century concerning it appeared the beauty and mystery of traditional liturgy and how love (as perceived by the celibate priesthood) can help one calculate the number of angels able to dance on the head of a pin (or something). Tony did manage to slip in the lie that JP2 had single handily managed to bring the Soviet Empire to ruin by smiting it with the jaw bone of a castrato or something. (You have to take your hat off to the way in which he sticks to his liturgy that one.) When will they take that particular canard out the back and shoot it?
But the thing that really stood out was the way in which Tony could not let Doogue utter more than three words without letting out an empathetic “mmmm” or chirrup. These are straight of any decent seminary’s handbook on active listening in the confessional but it does not make for good radio (or TV). And they are getting louder. A few months ago they sotto voce but now they are loud and insistent. Somebody should tell him that it is quite distracting and makes him sound more like an appointed prince of the church rather than the democratic politician he claims to be. Alternatively perhaps Pope Ben could hand him the biretta he so clearly lusts after and he could take off for a life of pleasure and study among the men’s men of the Curia.
One cost of the Roman Catholic Festival of Yoof (or whatever it is) that hasn’t been counted is its impact on education (at least the Catholic variety). My daughter’s friends who attend RC schools seem to be spending inordinate amounts of time both during and outside school hours preparing in various ways for the visit and it seems very little real school work is being attended to. It will be hard for some of them to ever catch up. The hidden costs of this festa will be with us for years it seems never mind the vast direct subsidies we are asked to chip in for by the supposedly secular state and federal governments.
Fact: Iggies is well known as an youngies venue where the wannabees hang out
most of the staff are part of the “in scene” and regard anyone over 25 as verboten
IT IS WELL KNOWN LOCALLY AS A PLACE TO GET POINTS-those that understand this last statement will understand the staffs arrogance and “holier than thou” one of the stat deccers nickname is “benji’ and that aint cause he is a lovable toy
della’s biggest mistake was going there in the first place
im sure the cops will turn up some very interesting facts.
Charles @65
Ok, what should local radio do, the same as what’s on Newsradio and Radio National? My biggest criticism of local radio in the last year or two is its tendency to get expert guests on and keep interrupting them with callers who make ill-informed comments. But isn’t that elitist of me to say they shouldn’t do that? Wouldn’t doing that be like only allowing people who know their stuff being allowed to comment in this channel? And sure they run cooking segments and they take talk-back calls on light-weight topics. But hey, they also get two to three times as many listeners as news radio and radio national combined.
Now you will say the ABC shouldn’t care about ratings. But i’d also say, how much funding would the ABC get if it only had the ratings of Radio national and NewsRadio? How many people would listen to programs like AM and PM if they weren’t on a more popular local radio station? It’s a question of which model of public broadcasting you support. Do you go down the US Public Radio path, which is real minority broadcasting, or do you go the BBC route, which is broader public broadcasting, providing a range of popular and more high-brow programming. These things are always a matter of balance. The ABC would be totally wrong not to have a network like Radio National, but no national network can ever do local radio well.
And just work out the cost of local radio. Radio National has one morning breakfast show. Local Radio has one in every capital and most regional centres. every one of them has between one and three off-air producers chasing stories and lining up talent, and often chasing the same talent. That’s not cheap and it’s not easy to do, but it is a great learning ground for young journalists, and you would be surprised how many senior journalists got their first breaks in off-air local radio production. But local radio is also popular, because it does a whole pile of local things, like lots of traffic and weather, and it does stories on things that directly affect peoples lives. That may be trivia, but hey, on a day to day basis, most people care much more about the little things that affect their daily life than they do about the big issues that Radio National covers. And remember, one of the most popular Radio National programs is always Life Matters, which deals with all those domestic life balance issues which a lot of people consider trivial.
I’ve always had a joke about how the 7:30 report can kill its ratings for the evening. My line up would be a story on vertical fiscal imbalance in the Commonwealth, a story on the need for furthering the Doha trade round, something on improving indigenous health, and then wrap it up with a story on the foreign policy dilemmas created by the collapse of Papua-New Guinea. All very worthy and important, but who would watch it! Every program has to have light and shade. If all ABC programs did the sort of programming heard on radio National, then the ratings would be tiny, and no one would even care whether the ABC was biased or not, because no one would be listening and its influence would be nil. Why are there so few complaints about SBS being biased, because it isn’t or because no one cares given its ratings?
But the one thing I’ve learnt about working for the ABC is that every member of the public will think they have the right to whinge at me about something the ABC changed that they didn’t like, or something they think it should do. There is one person I know who still whinges about the ABC’s decision to abandon a 15 minute radio bulletin at 6.45am. That decision was made 20 years ago!
The outcome of the Appeal into the sentencing of the pack rape offenders of the Aboriginal girl in Aurakun vindicates the concern expressed by the wider Community and here at PB. Perhaps some of the enthusiastic supporters of the judge and prosecutor then may now admit that they got it very wrong.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23861192-601,00.html
Doug @50. My comment was, what did the government say 6 months ago, not last week. I to be honest don’t know and have no interest in getting into any agrument about whaling.
But there are standard ways that a Canberra press conference is run, or a press statement issued. The spokesman, in this case Nelson, would make his brief statement and get his lines across for the cameras and radio mikes, and take a couple of questions, but a limited number. His press officer would also circulate a press release with a copy of the statement, and if it was an attack on the position of the government, it would almost always include a selection of past statements by the government. If you don’t do that, the first question would always be ‘When did the government say xyz…’.
It is very easy for people in here to say Nelson’s position is BS, but no reporter can refuse to report what he says. Vera said earlier that the media is just running his agenda. Well, he is running an agenda, as is the government, and the media does tend to report their agenda, or run with it, whatever you want to call it. If you’re a commentator, say someone like Piers Akerman, you can just dismiss the spin from both sides and write what you think is the truth. A lot of people in this channel seem to think that’s what all journalists should do. But it does rather strike me that a lot of people in here are certain that they know the truth, and they get very upset that people in the media aren’t reporting what they the listener knows is ‘the truth’.
Any physicist knows there are two sorts of statistical bias in an experiement, experimental bias and observer bias. I think the distinction should be remembered when chucking claims around about media bias.
I see the Daily Morongraph wants to make Iemma the bad guy in suspending Della Bosca. What next? So we are now to feel for John?
73 Antony Green – so is it your position that there is no bias operating in the media at the moment?
gusface #75
I’m sure the cops will find he did what political big nobs always do, throw their weight around. They have been carrying on that way for ever and it has never been a problem for the ALP before.
This is a power struggle about the unions. There is no way Rudd and Gillard would have made such a fuss about Neal if it wasn’t a way of bringing down della bosca.
76 – and what makes you so sure Piping? Real knowledge of the facts or just hopeful speculation?
Well said, Antony.
Well GB 77
1) Della Bosca was a problem for Gillard because he was heading the only opposition to her plans to centralise IR in Canberra
2) he is certainly a problem for Iemma for similar reasons re electricity privatisation
3) there were reports that Iemma was about to roll Della Bosca anyway and abolish his IR portfolio to meet Gillard’s purposes and
4) it is hard to believe that Rudd had to deal with Neal while on a fairly important mission in Japan just because of the issue itself, this is hardly new behaviour by either of them.
It looks a fairly obvious political play to me.
Obviously Gillard-Iemme didn’t manufacture the episode in the first place but they have clearly taken advantage of an opportunity as it arose.
79 – I’m not saying you are necessarily wrong but again that posting would fit nicely on the front page of the Daily Morongraph. All speculation but not an ounce of proof. Give me the proof and I’ll happily say you are right.
64 David Walsh, thanks for the memory jog. Don’t know how I could have forgotten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Nelson
GB 81 Proof of what? That Della Bosca has opposing political interests to Iemma/Gillard/Rudd? Or do you want the napkin they wrote the plans on? Stop worrying about the DT. I hardly feel sorry for Della Bosca!
So I’m to accept that what you say is correct? Why should I do that? Do you accept everything you read as gospel? Are you an “insider”? The napkin contents would be great.
Piping, even if JDB does oppose Gillard/Iemma/Rudd what is there to say your reasoning is correct? There are other political considerations that would have come into it. Rudd’s move was politically sound. Neal is out of the picture now. It’s back on JDB and, by the way, Iemma.
GB I’m not sure what other political considerations you mean. I think electricity privatisation and breaking with the unions is pretty important for Iemma at the moment and DB’s opposition to centralising IR must be the main guide to Gillard’s view of him (plus him being a NSW Right hack).
If you are worried that the DT’s sympathy campaign will work I would imagine no-one will give a stuff about Della Bosca. This is the most politically painless way Iemma can cut the union opposition off at the knees.
Antony, if you were honest with us knuckleheads you would not be so shy in admitting that journalists censor by omission all the time. The indignation you express at the suggestion Brendan Nelson’s agenda be judged worthy of omission is quite revelatory.
75
Gary Bruce
Apparently not, Online their excuse is it’s because they are young and inexperienced and underpaid poor things!
TV & radio have the “experienced” jurnos, I guess that suggests Insiders isn’t biased, I can’t come at that, but hey what would a knucklehead know?
45
Antony Green Says:
“If you want that sort of analysis, you will not, not, not, not get it in an on-line news service done on an hourly turn around basis. It’s always written by the youngest, most in-experienced and lowest paid journalists. The ones with more experience are doing newspapers, radio or television.”
86 – Piping I’m not worried about how JDB is perceived at all. I’m criticising the way the Daily Morongraph is trying to keep this story going when really now it is a matter of waiting for the investigation to finish.
IMHO you’re reading too much into Rudd’s and Gillard’s motives. I believe their motive was to get Neal off the front pages as quickly as possible and same with Iemma. By the way Sky Noos was saying how much Iemma relies on JDB. He’ll be back.
“The ones with more experience are doing newspapers, radio or television.”
Heaven help us.
The Piping Shrike #76
you say “I’m sure the cops will find he did what political big nobs always do, throw their weight around.”
You are way off track here imho.
Firstly they are investigating the opposing sworn statements in the stat decs. “He says / she says” classic situation. The cops need proof, which they are most unlikely to EVER find.
They do not throw a coin, they cannot say these political big nobs threw their weight around. Thats why we have separation of powers in our system.
Almost certainly, the cops will have no case to proceed with unless some real evidence of a stitch up like (illegally ?) taped conversations or phone calls, written documents etc come to light.
Again, I wasn’t there. Prehaps YOU were ? Because you have made a big call – “I’m sure the cops will find he did what political big nobs always do, throw their weight around.”
Lets just hold fire…..and what FACTS emerge.
In breaking news however Porkey Piers is reporting that Della farted at lunchtime on friday and is demanding Della be executed before 6 pm tonight….
Interesting blog. At least both sides seem to be contributing today.
ABC bias, hmmm, every time I listen to Philip Adams I scratch my head. And he operated all through the Howard years. Basically I think he’s about as relevant as his mate Gough, which isn’t at all. Other bias, well sniffer got saturation coverage in WA on ABC, for about a week, whereas the creep who propositioned a staffer for a threesome hardly got a mention, and none at all on TV news. Management refuses to talk about it. Otherwise they’re pretty good.
Rudd got himself elected by working out what people were annoyed about-fuel prices, grocery prices, whales,work life balance, and then suggested he’d fix it. Slowly people are working out that they were conned,he’s just a power mad bureaucrat, good at spin but basically a light weight. I’m still working out the thing on solar panels- if your income is above a certain level, your carbon emmissions don’t matter?
The rest of them- especially the Govts in NSW and WA, frankly completely and utterly drunk on power. Dreadful people.
I can take or leave Philip Adams himself, but the diversity and quality of guests on his program is second to none, and that is why I listen to it.
As to Rudd being nothing more than a con artist, spoken like a true partisan ideologue who will never concede any good he might do in his time.
I’m still working out the thing on solar panels- if your income is above a certain level, your carbon emmissions don’t matter?
Oh puhleese. Means testing is a completely legit way of restricting and targeting state support (you know, the dreaded welfare that conservatives claim to be so opposed to, unless of course you are John Howard trying to buy votes, in which case everybody gets invited to the party).
unless of course you are John Howard trying to buy votes, in which case everybody gets invited to the party
And the next government gets to clean the budgetary mess it causes.
I reckon Pipe-man has a point.He may be right, might be wrong, who knows?
But his input is happily accepted, indeed, needed around this place… IMHO
is he right?… no idea
is he wrong… no idea
Beats crapping on about how biased the OZ,ABC or whatever
“Rudd got himself elected by working out what people were annoyed about-fuel prices, grocery prices, whales,work life balance, and then suggested he’d fix it.” Rubbish.
“Slowly people are working out that they were conned,he’s just a power mad bureaucrat, good at spin but basically a light weight.” More rubbish.
This is straight from the Liberal Party handbook.
I think WorkChoices had something to do about it, and Global Warming
Poss Com, has a new blog, that people can offer a article they’ve written. This is one of the articles. Current to some discussion on the meeja.
http://thepossumbox.wordpress.com/2008/06/14/is-the-media-in-australia-suffering-from-groupthink/
Ian, if your income is above a certain limit of course your carbon emission matter. And with your high income, you can afford to fix them all up out of your own pocket.
You would, in some Fantasyland, love to believe that Rudd “suggested” he could fix the world’s problems. But it just ain’t true that he made any such suggestion. I find this constant carping on by the bunch of sore losers that call themselves “the Right” about how Rudd… shock!… horror!… played … oh my gosh!…. politics! to get elected genuinely hilarious.
For those who have been hiding under a rock for the whole of their lives, politics is what politicians do. John Howard, surely one of the most political animals in the menagerie, tried to make out he was the Solomon-like “Father Of The Nation”, everyone’s benign uncle, who’d dispense good advice to the littlies in the rest of the family, entirely without thought for himself or whether his words and deeds would have any effect on his chances for re-election.
What rot.
You can rave on all you like about what people thought was “suggested” to them by Rudd, but repeated attempts to pin “Interest Rates Will Always Be Lower Under The Coalition” type porkies on Kevin by experts have not washed. The only resort they have is to repeatedly claim that somehow or other Rudd knew people would interpret his words without the clearly stated qualifications made at the time and that is stupidity (or wilful ignorance, or bias, or all three) on the part of voters is somehow part of Rudd’s cunning master plan to promise the Earth and deliver dirt.
It is far better to have a reasoned debate and a clearly enunciated process of achieving a goal than to whip out an envelope from your pants pocket and scribble an “Aboriginal Intervention” or a “Murray-Darling Plan” on the back of it, and then present it to the people via your shills in the media who couldn’t give a toss about water or the aborigines’ plight as a work of statesmanlike genius.
What Howard was good at was not dropping the ball. That and bribing precisely-selected segments of the population with well-timed handouts that ultimately contributed to a completely misplaced feeling of well-being and that nothing could go wrong under the Little Master.
The ball he has passed onto Rudd is higher inflation, 12 successive rises in interest rates (the first ten under Howard’s government) and the sudden realisation that buying a McMansion in Western Sydney for twice what it’s worth doesn’t make you rich, especially when the price tanks. and still – no change from 1996 when Howard got into power – this country’s livliehood is based on digging holes in the ground and flogging off the debris to countries who really do know how to do something useful with it. We then buy this debris back in the form of imported cars, plasma screens and cheap clothing at ten times the price we sold it for. Wow, what a genius Howard was.
Howard knew things were headed for belly-up status. He also knew his confidence trick on the Australian public had worked too well. This is why Costello started talking doom and gloom on the economy with his ridiculous “finely tuned Ferrari” metaphor. Then, when it didn’t happen straightaway, they tried to delay the election until it did. They were like Dennis Conner sailing his America’s Cup yacht into the spectator fleet, hoping the Aussie boat would hit a motor launch and sink. Only, when interest rates went up just before the election the public turned on Howard and not towards him.
At least Rudd is trying. At least his government is trying to get some new ideas about who we are and where we are going up and running before we drown in our own complacency. And you blame him for not fixing the world’s problems up in all of seven months?
What has been the Opposition’s main contribution to the debate? Drop 5c a litre off the price of petrol. Since that announcement petrol has already gone up 15 cents. Within a month or so it may well be 20c. Who’s know where Brendan’s 5c went? Apart from that, nothing from the Opposition except a muddled message about whether Howard was right or wrong and endless speculation about who’s going to take over the helm of the doomed Liberal Party ship. It’s you classic Messiah Complex. We hear about these every day. Some bunch of deluded souls crawls into a hole of their own making expecting their guru or high priest to save them when the world ends. And it never happens, just like it won’t happen wioth the Libs until they face the reality that they were out-politicked by Rudd and that their brand stank to high heaven, out of power in all states and federally for the first time in history, their leader despatched to Barbados to watch the cricket and kibbitz from the sidelines in his spare time.
Look to your own side, Ian. Look to what they didn’t do in 12 long years about the way this country works. And then come back and tell us that all this can be – and was promised to be – fixed up in 7 short months.
Every country in the world is doing it tough this 2008. Howard’s greatest sin was that he convinced us that we were somehow immune to the malaise that now grips a world at the end of the era of oil.
Howard collected enough negative brownie points over the years to outweigh the supposed good brownie points. Enough people got to dislike him, had enough of him or saw little use for him in a future context and thus were thus willing to change.
WorkChoices, Iraq, AWB were enough to damage his brand and interest rate rises to put cracks in the economic myth.
But it still needed an alternative that was safe and was aware where Australians had moved to.
I think Rudd made himself acceptable by pursuing the economic conservative line – a main reason why people might refrain from changing.
Climate Change, thinking beyond the Mining Boom, domestic microeconomic issues, education, health are all issues Howard should have been on top of anyway – the fact that he wasn’t only shows that he was past it as a deserving PM.
His personal ideological? pursuits stopped him from seeing the things he should have – too busy pouring money in to private schools, protecting the Green Mafia enterprises, trying to wedge State govts out of office through starving health funding..etc
In fact Australians were actually quite on the ball, they one way or another chose rightly. They had a PM who was no longer interested in Australians or their well being and were presented with an acceptable alternative.
Sydney Morning Herald, 5 May 2008
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/rudd-underlines-labors-thin-margin-for-error/2008/05/04/1209839444366.html?page=2
On Gough
“There was a strong feeling of anger and a need for cultural self-expression. There was a feeling of cultural lockout. There was a feeling, which the Whitlam government dispelled, that we couldn’t be creators, that creation was done by finer minds elsewhere. There was a great inferiority complex that we were a worthless nation culturally. Sneering at Australians was a long standing Bristish pastime, fairly fulsomely reinforced by numbers of Australians.
Source: Greg Sheridan, Australian, 28 April 1992.
I’ve long thought Gough gave Australians their identity, be proud of yourselves and your achievements, be yourself. For that he deserves the praise as “father of the nation”. The lib view of Howard as father of the nation is more inline of letting daddy tell you what to do and how to behave, God Queen and country, Australian is a christian nation with too many asians and all the way with GBW.
I recall a conversation I had where I said Gough showed us what Australia could be, with health, higher education and a fairer sharing of the riches, but I was corrected by the person saying “what Australia should be”.
I appreciate the responses from Antony, but I don’t think you should have to feel you have to defend the whole organisation and I don’t think people should be whinging at you for the whole organisation. I actually agree local radio needs to be different from RN or News Radio, and clearly people will have different opinions on how well it succeeds. Personally there are some segments I enjoy, and some I never hear, and some, not so much. The different broadcasters become very well known to those who listen and again, clearly some will appeal more than others depending on style and what sort of segment they are presenting. I get crabby with Jon Faine for talking over people he’s interviewing, but on the whole, he’ll argue both sides of an issue, though that can get a bit predictable. My vote for intelligent, well researched and well conducted interviews goes to Ali Moore. Class, in my view, and just wish there was more of it.
If Antonio is around, maybe, he or someone who knows, could explain why it’s the most junior people who run it. I seem to recall Antonio said it was started, own initiative, by some journos in Brisbane and hadn’t had much in the way of resourcing put into it?
BTW, love The Shrike’s theory about Gillard and Iemma and the DBs. Sounds wonderfully Macchiavellian, plausible enough and just like a good Labor ambush.LOL.
Turning Worm @87. Of course, they all pick and choose, but censor is far to pejorative a description. The volume of material that floods a news room every day is vast and there has to be some selection process. That process is going to be different for the Daily Telegraph, the Financial Review, the ABC, the Australian, Channel 10, etc.
I like many people in the media get loads of press releases from the Citizens Electoral Council. I just delete them as soon as I see them. I suppose that’s censorship, but I really don’t believe their claim that the British Royal Family is responsible for most of the world’s illegal drug sales. I once received a two volume epic by some viewer who quoted vast reams of international law explaining how Australia’s signing of the Treaty of Versaille rendered Australia’s constitution null and void and therefore all laws passed since 1919 were invalid. I was going to suggest he try testing it in the High Court, but of course the High Court had also become null and void. If its censorship to ignore that possibly important story, I admit to it.
What has changed in recent years is rolling news formats, always common in radio, but now used by Sky News and by media internet sites. Politicians et al now frame their press releases around this cycle, which means stories have a habit of giving only one side in an update. That’s not bias, it’s just trying to deliver into a rolling format.
Compare and contrast – the media scrutiny when Rudd’s became Opposition Leader in late 2006 where every bit of miniscule was dissected and regurgitated by the media, to Brendan Nelson as newly elected Opposition Leader.
Same position, (sorry, alternative PM) and what do we get – zip, nada, nothing, not one expose of that woman at the petrol pump with only $20, not one verification of the man that had suicided who left 2 or was it 3 children, and who was that homeless person he sat down with in the gutter at 3 am in the morning?
Balanced my arse
“I really don’t believe their claim that the British Royal Family is responsible for most of the world’s illegal drug sales”
So how do you explain Charles wanting to be a tampon and talking to his plants? sounds like testing the product to me.
Antony, surely if the rolling news format has become more important/influential in recent years, wouldn’t this suggest that more senior staff should be doing the sifting of whatever comes in? Particularly, if it then gets rolled into bulletins?
An analogy from health, where I work. We put senior, experienced staff in charge of the most dangerous and difficult areas, such as Emergency Departments. Junior staff work there to gain experience, but are supervised. This is not to say that there aren’t stuff ups, but it just seems more sensible. What people such as myself and others have noticed are things like “The Opposition whomever states that…”, in later bulletins, “The Opposition and so on” is omitted. There may be organisational reasons why the online section has evolved the way it has, and why it’s staffed by junior folk, but it sure seems to me it needs some attention.
Also recommend the essay on groupthink in The Possum Box by Ad Astra, for what I think many of us are on about. Oh, and I’d toss out anything sent by the Citizens Electoral Council as well. And thank you for taking the time to provide more of a picture.
Antony Green @ 45 -
If you want that sort of analysis, you will not, not, not, not get it in an on-line news service done on an hourly turn around basis. It’s always written by the youngest, most in-experienced and lowest paid journalists.
If they are simply regurgitating whatever spin is presented to them then this is not journalism, its PR. They may as well just put up the press releases and be honest about it by clearly marking them as such. Even better, just put up links to the PR section of the political parties and put the money saved to better use.
The ones with more experience are doing newspapers, radio or television.
Where they seem to do pretty much the same thing as those working on the website!
.
Ian @ 92 -
I’m still working out the thing on solar panels- if your income is above a certain level, your carbon emmissions don’t matter?
If the gaol is simply to reduce carbon emissions there are cheaper, more effective ways the federal government could spend the $8,000 subsidy. For example, assisting people to upgrade their homes to 5-star energy ratings would give far more bang for buck. Making solar cells produces a lot of carbon (and toxic heavy metals) which takes 30+% of their lifespan to recover.
Howard introduced the subsidy because he needed to look like he was doing something about global warming without actually doing very much because that might entail causing voters (and the coal industry) pain. So he did what he usually did in such situations, chucked a bucket of money at his PR problem without caring about the result, or lack thereof.
If pensioners can afford a solar system with the subsidy, and I know several, then people on $100K can probably afford the full $11-12K for a 1KWh grid-connect system, especially given the attractive returns on offer in some states for electricity uploaded to the grid.
Antony 73
I appreciate your reply to my 50. It is probably unfair to ask you to comment on media bias given the work you do for ABC and your public profile.
Anyway my comments on your reply are as follows:-
The process you describe includes-
“His press officer would also circulate a press release with a copy of the statement, and if it was an attack on the position of the government, it would almost always include a selection of past statements by the government. If you don’t do that, the first question would always be ‘When did the government say xyz…”
Does the reporter verify the Opposition handout of the past Gov’t statements for accuracy? Or does he/she simply accept the Opposition’s word for it? If not, it could say anything and the reporter would not know the difference. And consequently this is passed onto the Public as fact.
What Rudd said 6 months ago is part of the equation. This needs to be lined up with what he said this week and is the crux of Nelson’s attack. The reporter supposedlly tries to roundoff the story by saying “Mr Rudd discussed whaling with his Japanese counterpart, Yasuo Fukuda, this week and the two men agreed to seek to resolve their disagreements through diplomatic means” . But what is the source of this info- Opposition’s handout? Where is Rudd’s actual word’s? His public statements I am aware of are in 50. The story is actually incomplete and gives the wrong impression and seems to support Nelson’s claim that the Gov’t is softening its position.
You might justify what you are saying by Process. I as a consumer look at the Outcome. The Outcome is not satisfactory. The success of the Process is measured by its Outcome.
Your choice of Piers Akerman as an example of someone who can “dismiss the spin from both sides and write what you think is the truth” sort of spoils the third paragraph for me. But I would prefer reporters to most times just report the facts properly, and to have verified these fact and statements handed out to them by either side. Many times I would prefer to be spared their opinions or their slant on the news, but if given the comments need to be balanced.
This is only an example and is about how the media does its reporting, not about whaling.
Antony, I’m sorry but your defence of press conferences (where journalists simply – and safely – stenograph what is said) is pretty lame.
That’s the problem, not the solution.
The water has begun to boil but the frog just thinks its getting warmer around here.
If to transcribe Liberal talking points as “facts” (as in “it’s a fact it was said”) is regarded as good, honest journalism, we’re further gone down the road to perdition than I thought.
A reminder: the Libs lost the last election. Senator Alston has departed the stage. They don’t sack ABC jourmos or banish them to the Siberian beat anymore for “unproductive phrasing”. We’re not “at war” with Iraq today. Lives are not at stake.
What is the ABC so scared of that they have abandoned their charter to present the news, as opposed to the spin?
Listen to the footy, the League or the AFL. Try the cricket commentators. Those guys don’t pull punches. Why is it that sport gets a fairer and more balanced, objective treatment than politics?
No, no bias in the media???
Antony, give me a break! LOL. The majority MSM is so pathetically biased in favour of the coalition that – it’s hilarious.
O.K. Let’s take Rugbt League for example. Ray Warren supports Parramatta, Paul Vautin supports Queensland, Mathew Johns supports Newcastle, but their commentry is professional, unbiased and informative. A very far cry from most News Ltd journalists.
If the media is stupid enough to supply so much oxygen to anything the coalition says without fair and proper scrutiny, it will continue to drag down it’s own standards.
I have criticized certain journalists in the past, but I would like to compliment three who I believe are outstanding and head and shoulders above the rest:
- Laurie Oakes (who I would say normally votes coalition).
- Kerrie ‘O Brien (who I would say normally votes labor).
- Paul Bonjourno (who I would say normally votes coalition).
Yes, another one to the Swans.
Geelong, we are comin’ to get you.
Centre 112
Michelle Gratan from the Age is another. She is normally balanced.
I love it when the left on the blogosphere goes into meltdown about media bias, particularly when it comes to the ABC. You all sound so uncannily like the right on the blogosphere – albeit slightly more grammatically correct and only slightly less deranged – that any rational person is left with the impression that there is a circular argument going on here. All good fodder for William’s PhD, nonetheless, and proof, if needs be, that the ABC is unbiased and doing its job.
Antony, there is no point in arguing with these people. They hate journalists, although most of them love you. Just ignore them.
I have no idea what most of you are on about. There has always been bias in the media since the first cave man drew a picture of his last hunt (”No, that mammoth hasn’t that big, you’re biased”). The opinion writers are of course extemely biased but that is because they are giving an opinion. But on the whole, you are general mistaking weak and sloppy journalism combined with a tendancy for hysteria for bias.
Antony Green Says:
June 14th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Sounds like a pretty good line up to me.
I am a consumer of ABC radio and as I have spent more time than I want to in the US, US public radio. I like the US congress channels ( I wish we did something similar here) and I enjoy “all things considered” in the US and on news radio in Australia. When it comes to public broadcasting the US is not a baron landscape.
I accept that when you consider local radio is the training ground for most of Australia’s media personnel, the tax dollars spent on local radio is worth while, so I apologize.
I’m not complaining about the talk back, what I am complaining about is the trivialization of politics, and I would argue that occurs because of what our media choses to report and yes I think if Brenden choses to deal in trivia he should be ignored.
I think the current problem is there are some very bright people on the labor side of politics and some real duds leading the Liberal side ( some good people on the backbench), one side suited to intelligent debate ( though Rudd isn’t doing well of late) and the other side, to trivial sound bites.
And I disagree that good political commentary can only be had on the national channels, one of the best I have heard was on triple J ( though I suppose that is a national channel also).
Hell the way things are going I will follow my daughters lead and start listening to Cactus Island for my daily political update.
P.S.
Love your work.
P.P.S
Did I mention I miss the 15 min news update; oh never mind.
I just noticed my cave man has some grammar issues.
Harry
If you’re looking for some good Emergency Doctors, I’ve got plenty on offer in SA. 46 of ours resigned yesterday. I’ve got 70 anaesthetists as well. All I need is a good offer!
What was that Ruddski said about health “The buck stops here.”
Anaesthetists to quit as SA’s health system in crisis
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23857900-5006301,00.html
charles 117
At last another bludger who listens to Triple J. And I agree, they often have the best political analysis because no-one listens to them and they don’t care if they sound biased or not. My favourite media moment from the last elections was when Kate from Hack slaughtered Turnbull in an interview on the Environment. She ended up yelling at him “So in summary, you are saying ‘Just trust us but we have no policies’. YOU ARE GIVING US NOTHING MR TURNBULL, NOTHING!”
Doug #114
Michelle Gratten is the fairest most even handed jurno going round.
I thought highly of lenore taylor while she was at afr but have not seen the quality we used to see since she switched to the shanahanhanahans squalid propaganda sheet.
Channel 9 seems – occasionally seem to have become less rabid since packer sold out, but oakes has never impressed me. He has given the libs an easy ride for 30 yrs that I recall.
Yes Doug, Michelle Gratan is very good.
I would like to bet that she would usually vote liberal. But you know she is professional and balanced when someone like Cossie tells her if she’s been taking her prescriptions.
Diogenes, unfortunately, if we pinch them, S.A. is in even worse trouble. Nevertheless, some of them will probably wind up here, just making the whole health care delivery system even more of a nightmare. The new Women’s Hospital was just opened in Melbourne, whiz bang, bells and whistles for medium to high risk care. Wouldn’t you know it, there’s a demonstration outside mostly of women from Broadmeadows, who feel marginalised in their local hospitals ( they’re mostly Muslim women, which puzzles me, as mostly this is a significant demographic in their local hospitals, both patients and a lot of staff) , they say, or just want to go to the Women’s. Frankly, there’s no pleasing some folk.
Speaking of media bias, I will never forget when Beazley blew Howard away in their first 1998 debate. Laurie Oakes and the audience gave it to Beazley easily.
Oakes said that Howard would be too chicken to debate Beazley again given their performances, but the media had four weeks for its wheels to spin to recover any damage done to the coalition.
People always perceive media bias against which ever political party they support. It comes from having their own internal bias and thinking everyone should think like them.
LTEP, that’s not what this conversation has been about, and if you think that’s true, you’ve missed the point entirely.
Latest from the Poison Dwarf.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23863698-5005374,00.html
This Poisoned Dwarf contribution is wishful thinking at its best.
LTEP, nonesense like usual.
Most people here are intelligent enough to see if there is any bias towards or against their political preferences, or sport for that matter (football commentators for e.g.).
I’m sure most here would want both parties to be given an equally fair go, according to their merits.
LTEP has hit the nail on the head. People see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear. Take religion, for example.
Pessimism? With polls only a party could dream of? You have to be joking.
People aare capable of recognising unfair bias when they see it. It’s not that the government is being criticised that’s the problem. It’s the way they are being criticised. The best way to explain this is what one contributor here said on a previous thread. If Rudd walked over the Sydney Harbour Bridge it would be reported that he did so because he couldn’t swim. A negative angle is found. Just read the Poisoned Dwarf for exhibit A.
Yes Gary B, maybe Marktwain could enlighten us on his views of the unbiased column in 127.
We’re all ears.
Gary, Harry and others, if you read the right-wing blogs, which I don’t suggest you do if you have just eaten or have a full head of hair, or small children or pets, or a brain, the Australian political media elite believes that the sun is shining so blindingly out of Kev’s alimentary canal that Mercury has been overtaken as the most gloriously enlightened planet in our solar system. Using Glenn Milne as exhibit A is not a wise thing to do.
Couple of facts on the media. The majority of print media readership in the world is interested in celebrity gossip/photos, food and how to prepare it for your man, and fashion. The majority of television media viewers in the world are interested in the same, in addition to sport, Hugh Heffner and/or supermodels, soap operas and, in our small part of the world, how your mechanic is ripping you off (combined audience of TT/ACA in Australia every weeknight is approx 2.5 million). The majority of radio media listeners in the world are interested in the greatest hits from the 70s and 80s and the word of Jesus. The majority of internet media consumers in the world are interested in pornography.
That’s only my biased opinion. I do have evidence to back it up, however.
113
Centre Says:
June 14th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Yes, another one to the Swans.
Did you see the Dali Lama at the game in his Swannies gear?
how could they lose withthat sort of support
Yes Vera, and guess who the biggest losers will be if the Swans keep winning? News Ltd’s Superleague LOL.
I want the Swans in the AFL grand final. And a Storm-Broncos NRL grand final in spite.
Frank 127
The PD right on cue in preparation for Nelson’s attack on Rudd next week!
And the ABC report regarding the whaling sounds like it was based on a Liberal handout. At the very least poor process.
Yep, his Modus Operandi is to write an attack article on Rudd to appear just in time to be fed by the Insiders and the Sunday TV news and continued in Parliament by Brenda.
There is no bias because people only see what they want to see, there is no such thing as fact. I wonder how many evils are excused on that basis,
The real Mark Twain wrote that exposure to good satire made citizens less likely to be “shriveled into sheep.”
………and good, unexaggerated reporting.
99 Bushfire Bill, yer blood is worth bottling mate, such a succinct wrap-up of the reality. Keep it up!
Kina:
There is no bias because people only see what they want to see, there is no such thing as fact. I wonder how many evils are excused on that basis,
You’re calling media bias ‘evil’? Really… it’s all a bit melodramatic. It’s impossible to present a truly impartial account of facts. Even if it were, newspapers aren’t a public service… they’re run as businesses. They make far more money if they put a sensationalist spin on things.
Centre:
Most people here are intelligent enough to see if there is any bias towards or against their political preferences, or sport for that matter (football commentators for e.g.).
I’m sure most here would want both parties to be given an equally fair go, according to their merits.
That’s not what I’ve observed watching these discussions. People continually rubbish any news report which paints the Government even in a slightly negative way as biased and then praise reports which criticise the Opposition as impartial. If you visit websites frequented by more right wing commenters you see the exact opposite.
Yes there is media bias… but it’s not something we should dwell on. Personally I never even bother reading anything written by certain ‘journalists’ and don’t see why other people can’t resist.
There he goes again.
The Poison Dwarf:
Was seen?
“Was seen” by whom? A bunch of opinionated journos quoting each other in a monumental circle-jerk a few months ago. This is just a variation on his claim that “everyone in Canberra knows what Rudd’s up to with Brian Burke”, when he couldn’t pin a thing on him with actual, y’know, facts.
Here’s how they do it…
One of them writes an opinion piece, perhaps seeded by a comment or two from a whinger in the party room. Perhaps not.
Next day another one writes a similar opinion piece, fleshing out the nuances. The day after that, a couple of journos, possibly at other media organizations (but it’s not compulsory), pick up the theme. By the fourth day the original writer starts referring to “reports in the media”.
At the end of a week they’re all out there bootstrapping the story by quoting each other. If we’re lucky there’s a spot on a Sunday news show panel where they can all giggle. Within a couple more days we have our result: whatever it is is now established fact.
The Australian is good for this. Once a year they write a “Tax Revolt” story and blow it up into thousands marching in the streets with torches and pitchforks. They’ve been running this one for the 35 years I’ve been reading their rag, once a year, like clockwork.
The other favourite is “judgement”. Rudd cautions loudmouth female member for Central Coast seat over a few recent outbursts by her. If he waits too long he’s gutless and this reflects on his judgement. If he goes in too soon it’s overly precipitate action and this reflects on his judgement. If he times it just right, then his action is too weak, because he should have sacked her, not warned her. Once again his judgement is called into question. Alternatively, he’s working his MPs too hard, and is it any wonder they crack up over a trivial incident at a restaurant? You guessed it: poor judgement. If the last line is taken, expect headlines telling us about, “Belinda’s Agony: The Man Who Wrecked My Life”, referring to one K. Rudd, who clearly has… unsound judgement. And if his judgement is lacking on such a small matter, just imagine what it would be on an important one.
All but the last of the above scenarios were run out by Christopher Pyne on Lateline last Friday night, with Virginia “My job is to argue the government’s case if they can’t be bothered turning up to argue it themselves, but only if it’s a Liberal government” Trioli a willing urger.
They don’t always work. When Milne tried to slander Rudd by saying he’d been kicked out of the strip club for rowdy behavior, it only lasted a couple of days, despite Milne’s best efforts at eyebrow raising. No apology required, it’s only an opinion piece, after all.
LTEP
If papers are run as businesses and the polls are in front for labor, why the anti labor crap?
You can always sell more papers by bashing the Government.
142 Bushfire Bill – Very well put.
I just wonder why there are people here who believe the media should be beyond scrutiny. How is it we are expecred to accept a journalist can quite literally make things up and run with it but he/she is beyond scrutiny? Why is it we don’t expect them to have carefully researched their “facts” before going to press? Why is it we accept the process of reporting, as correctly outlined by BB, as reasonable?
LTEP, over to you.
… and when they were the Opposition, by bashing the Opposition.
Why don’t we expect them to have carefully researched their facts, these “more experienced” journalists who work for the newspapers?
Because they have busy schedules, unrelenting deadlines, an hourly news cycle, 24/7 coverage. There’s no time left for the truth. They should just print what they think, and hope it will become the truth.
Maybe the government needs to re-evaluate their media management? If the Coalition can get their spokesmen’s soundbites published (uncritically, as fact) with jaw-dropping unanimity, the government needs to aggressively seek airtime for its Ministers’ statements.
Given the biased coverage against them they might understandably be loath to enter the lion’s den. But it is either that or an uncontested anti-Labor onslaught.
147 – That’s certainly the message we’re given and it bloody stinks.
I think the problem stemmed back before the election. The media had their collective nickers in a not by the way they were being “handled”. Just to illustrate one instance I recall an outcry by journalists because Rudd would “control” news conferences bu pointing to the next interrogator. Now, I’m not suggesting a bit of “get back” here, no bugger it, I am.
Make “not” Knot.
Having just heard Belinda Neals comments to Sophie Mirabella on the Insiders the question has to be: What on earth was Neal trying to gain by this? It was just extremely dumb, particular as she was caught out.
Current betting markets. (Will someone please tell G Milne):
Centrebet
Labor $1.19
Any Other Party $4.50
IASBet
Labor $1.25
Any Other Party $4.00
Sportingbet
Labor $1.18
Coaltion $4.50
.. and out of interest, the US election
Sportsacumen
Obama $1.55
McCain $2.80
I like the fact that it is Any Other Party; Suggests that the odds of the Liberal Party surviving in its current form is not good.
As Rudd has correctly said she needs help. Anyone carrying on the way she has is not thinking straight. Should she be thrown on the scrap heap and forgotten? Does a person deserve to be helped and given a second chance? We’ll see what “Just Call Me” has to say this week. Boy, has he been quiet on this since Rudd intervened.
153 Rx – you know that Glenn doesn’t let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Gary Bruce, I don’t know a lot about this Milne. Was he one of the chorus of “Honeymoon is over” prophets proven wrong again and again? If so, his credibility as analyst/forecaster must be in question.
The betting markets, as they stand at the moment, also hint at the dubiousness of his salivating “one-term-Rudd” predictions
There’s absolutely no evidence of this being a one term government and any speculation that it could be is fantasy.
Sure, the Government hasn’t been stunningly brilliant in any way… but we’re used to that after 11 years of Coalition Government.
In other, non-pseph political news… I’m not sure whether anyone has raised it but this week the Canadian Conservative Government apologised to Canada’s indigenous population. They, however, had the guts to include a $2 billion compensation fund.
According to the Poisoned Dwarf on Insiders, Julia Gillard has shown more leadership than Rudd for being the first to act on the Belinda Neale debacle.
Hello, you FLY that’s just been sprayed by mortein, the Prime Minister is showing real leadership representing our country in Japan, instead of participating in cheap media garbage that is dished out by the likes of you.
The Coalition parrots have begun reciting the Milne ‘piece’ …
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.politics/browse_thread/thread/6c0ac60242af66d5#
LTEP, the Rudd Labor government being attacked from the left – hysterical.
The right wing commentators are now pushing the line that Gillard is out performing Rudd. Bolt suggested as much too in a recent article apparently, having been told about it and not read it. These are the same people who were warning us about Gillard before the last election. Boy they sprout BS.
Milne is now a Gillard supporter? This bloke is a joke, as he proved that night of the Walkey Awards LOL
Typo: Walkley Awards
Those comments from Neal in parliament were very very bad.
I’m still a bit shocked actually, which is unusual, It was probably the way she repeated them
It puts big dent in the whole sisterhood argument doesn’t it? You know the one, men wouldn’t cop this in the media, Mark Latham didn’t, so why a does a woman etc etc.
Yes Gary, that is their tactics now. How desperate have they become. Not only have we proudly exposed their media bias, this is now war! A war we are not going lose.
165 – Yes, repeating the comments would suggest it was not an off the cuff remark but some sort of nasty tactic. Plus they were rather coldly delivered, where as if they were delivered in a fit of anger it would have been more understandable.
It is amazing that if people knew Neal’s b1tchiness would be an issue that she was pre-selected. But then again is very like the NSW Right to preselect someone on the grounds of relationship and not talent.
If we are going to change government in this country, it should be based on performance and not MSM preference.
If the conservatives are serious about becoming a force again in politics, they should immediately transfer Joe Hockey to lead the state liberal party. The first step would be to win a state election and then go from there.
Mumble seems to be doing his own impression of anti -Rudd politics. I think he’s spending too much time in Canberra.
136
Doug Says:
The PD right on cue in preparation for Nelson’s attack on Rudd next week!
And the ABC report regarding the whaling sounds like it was based on a Liberal handout. At the very least poor process.
137
Frank Calabrese Says:
Yep, his Modus Operandi is to write an attack article on Rudd to appear just in time to be fed by the Insiders and the Sunday TV news and continued in Parliament by Brenda.
I said basically the same thing at #44 and was told off by A Green for being a knucklehead who didn’t know what she was talking about.
Is he the site referee, was I given a red card? Should I be in the sin bin?
LOL Vera, I have been called a lot worse.
We are in the early processes of exposing the power of the media and the way they really operate, which is great for our democracy.
You only need to compare political reporting when Howard was in government and labor in opposition to the current situation.
So why the MSM bias in favour of the coalition???
Simple, because their is more money in it for the top-end-of-town with them in power and therefore weak journos lick their @rse.
The Member for Burnett had better be right about his story of Beattie and Rose having had a relationship. With each passing day it is looking more unlikely to have been the case.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23866553-601,00.html
On journalism…
Back in the dark ages, when I trained as a journalist (the last generation before Journalism switched to university “training” -and the last before Spellchecking and computer-based subediting) the two most important lessons I learned were:
1. Check your facts, and verify them if possible through another source.
2. Quote other sources for balance.
Reading one’s own copy before submitting it was also highly recommended. Too many errors in copy might result in banishment for months to writing weather reports, or proof-reading other journos’ copy.
I probably sound like a tired old fart lamenting the long-lost golden days, but I really think the cadet system was so much better at producing quality journalists than the current university system. Stories -particularly of a political nature- were better researched -and certainly better written- than they are now. And there was far less ‘editorialising’ in news stories. Furthermore, only the most senior journalists would have their stories credited with a byline, and even they would write according to the House Style -a concept which seems to have gone the way of hot-metal lynotype and sheet-fed presses.
Journalists seem now to put more emphasis on establishing and mantaining ‘leaks’ -or more properly ‘leakers’- than contacts. The trouble with this is the journalist becomes dependent on the drip-feed, and is loath to write anything that may offend the leaker and so threaten his/her supply of easy copy. Ergo: bias becomes entrenched. The Poison Dwarf is only the most glaring example of this dysfunction.
The digitisation of journalism hasn’t helped standards either. A reporter can now file copy directly to the page, with sub-editors reduced to the role of desktop publishers. A quick spellcheck is a poor substitute for thorough, professional proof-reading.
I dunno, maybe there just isn’t time anymore to get things right, given the pressure just to get things out.
According to Antony Green, the Member for Burnett has a nominal margin after the redistribution of 7.4% which is not huge if the local member has shot himself in the foot. It also will be a devastating blow for the new Pineapple Party if this is the standard being set by it’s Shadow Ministers.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/861
I sent our friend Piers a copy of the following excellent posting by Ad astra on Possum’s blog.
http://thepossumbox.wordpress.com/2008/06/14/is-the-media-in-australia-suffering-from-groupthink/
This is his reply.
“That’s pretty funny. When every other journalist was panting after Rudd I believe I said he was a fraud. Now that others are saying it, am I meant to switch?
I don’t think you’d find many to support the proposition that I am a member of a “groupthink”.
It is more often found in among those cited by your sourc e – Marr etc.
Best wishes”
What a tool. At least he replies I suppose.
Vera 170
No Vera – you say and think what you believe. That is your right.
Don’t let name calling put you off.
I am glad you said what you did as it sparked a discussion which helped a good number of us.
Rudd is taking on the AMA. No love lost there.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rudd-says-govt-will-simply-replace-ama/2008/06/15/1213468219286.html
Has Piers come out with any “revelations” about the Heiner affair in recent times?
Few things in life would give me greater pleasure than to see the AMA cut down to size. They do not speak for all doctors and do not always have the patients’ best interests at heart.
I really agree with the various previously posted comments about media bias but I suspect there is a very simple reason for it…selling copy!
The foment from right-wing commentators means that the neo-cons will read it because they approve and the true believers will read it because they disapprove!!
RX 138
“Maybe the government needs to re-evaluate their media management? If the Coalition can get their spokesmen’s soundbites published (uncritically, as fact) with jaw-dropping unanimity, the government needs to aggressively seek airtime for its Ministers’ statements.
Given the biased coverage against them they might understandably be loath to enter the lion’s den. But it is either that or an uncontested anti-Labor onslaught.”
I am concerned that over time the Gov’t’s credibility may get undermined, although not sure to what extent. But this I do know if the Liberals happen to win government by such strategies they will owe the media bigtime. That plastic man Nelson may be then the PM(Heaven forbid) but the media will be very influential in running the country – far more than they are now. Very bad for Ausralia.
Kina 138
“There is no bias because people only see what they want to see, there is no such thing as fact. I wonder how many evils are excused on that basis,”
There is no moral standard generally recognised these days and one person’s opinion seems to be as good as another’s. I believe we have lost something. Now everyone has bias and if that was used as a reason to have no discussion no one would talk to anyone else about anything important. That is plainly ridiculous. Also it is used too much as a cop out to anyone who either cannot be bothered, or if they have nothing real to contribute.
I think there are two issues: one is bias and the other is lack of standards.
The ABC tries overly hard to avoid any suspicion of bias. This has let to it being an emasculated mouthpiece of both major parties.
Lots of you have pointed out the decline in standards at the ABC. Does anyone remember the pitiful performance of the ABC on Election Night 2007? It exemplified the sad decline of a formerly great Aussie institution. They shot all their credibility in one night. They couldn’t even work out which party was winning for most of the night and they didn’t even seem to care.
I am getting very angry with the posters on this site alleging that Piers is associated with ‘groupthink’. I think they need a good hard look at themselves for making such baseless allegations. I happen to know that Piers is not associated with any such thing. Further to that, I beleive that Piers is not associated in any way to the word ‘think’ either. I beleive the correct words are ‘groupfink’ and ‘fink’. :p
Tom.
Doug @109. I don’t see the sort of bias that gets people in this channel frothing at the mouth, though some outlets and some journalists have a tendency to lean one way or the other.
On insiders this morning, they were discussing the list of past government statements on whaling issued by the opposition, which confirms my suscpicion that one existed. As I said, it is standard practice in politics when launching an attack to include reference to past statements, which is why I said in the first place that journalists couldn’t just dismiss Nelson’s statement as BS and refuse to report it. It may be mindlessly epistemological of me to say so, but a few people here tend to use the word ‘know’ when they actually mean ‘believe’. There is a difference.
In the hour after the press conference, it is unlikely that any journalist would have been able to verify the list, they would generally be reported as an Opposition claim. By now, the government would have gone through the Opposition list with a fine tooth comb, so if there were lies or distortions we would know about them by now. No doubt the government is issuing its own list of its position on whaling. And some poor mug journalist has to try and do a report with a whole pile of overlapping and contradictory statements from both sides and try to work out some picture of the truth.
Oppositions and governments put out stories that have certain spins, but they don’t lie or blatantly distort. I can think of one or two opposition spokesmen in my years of covering politics who have distributed stories that turned out to be completely wrong and left journalists looking like gooses. Let’s just say, those frontbenchers found it much harder to get journalists to take their stories in future. Journalists will put up with spin, but they won’t put up with lies or misrepresentations.
Milne deserves an email for his ridiculous one-term stuff, with recent poll result attached
What amazing is that this Liberal spin doctor is actually called a political reporter/commentator. Easier to just get his copy from the Liberal party/ Crosby-Textor handbook, I guess. Its bad enough that the Japan stuff has been peddled without the SLIGHTEST best of evidence. The narrative about the public getting tired of Rudd isnt just wishful thinking, its plain delusional?? Milne really cares about the polls when they shift the Liberals way, but I think he has forgotten to read the 2PP results
Email to Milne:
Mr Milne,
It was difficult to read your latest diatribe straight out of the Liberal party handbook. You talk about the so-called problems Rudd is facing without a shred of evidence. The latest Morgan is 58.5/41.5, the latest Newspoll 57/43. They predict obliteration for the opposition. Rudd has had record PPM ratings. I appreciate that your piece is a bit of fanciful wishful thinking, but dont you think you owe it to readers to back what you say with evidence, and balance it with what the polls are saying?
Milnes address for others. I’ll go now not much fun here on youre own!!
milneg@theaustralian.com.au
Andrew: will Milne reply to your email? I wonder………………..
Vera – chin up knucklehead and to all knuckleheads
For what it’s worth, I’m reading Mungo MacCallum’s Poll Dancing (covering the 2007 election) – have you read it?
There’s more, a whoe lot more but LOL tho, Mungo couldn’t have foreseen the Scores fiasco when he wrote that, but hey, gives us a clue who is on the right track on the media.
Antony 185
I understand more of where you are coming from now.
No, I don’t expect the Opposition or Gov’t to put out outright lies or bad distortions as this will be counter productive re their credibility. But there would be heavy spin and from both sides.
But the problem still remains – The outcome is not satisfactory and therefore the process is not right. The whaling example report by the ABC shows how just slight spin on one sentence can change the whole slant of the report. This is what has been happening in other reports and possibly far worse. I would be far more comfortable if the reporter did verify the facts rather than depending on the opposing party to do so. Then the ABC could get back to being independent like it used to, rather than the resulting story in a case like this being a compromise between the two conflicting versions. I understand that time is a factor but this should not excuse anybody.
There is some attrocious bias in the commercial media and names mentioned in this blog come to mind. There are also some good journalists in the commercial and ABC and also names in this blog come to mind.
If the Board of the ABC were truly Independent and did not consist of a number of well known right wingers it would do much to put to rest suspicions that a some people have now of the ABC. I am not saying the right should not be represented but they should be balanced by people from the centre and the left. But I would not expect you to comment on that for obvious reasons.
I’ve watched that pre-mixed drink ad twice now and still can’t work out if it is for real and therefore I’m just out of touch, or whether it’s a spoof.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=B610gp0IKZE
Doug, I’ve worked at the ABC for 18 years and never met a member of the board, so I very much doubt the people writing on-line news copy have or are influenced directly by them. And to be honest, I don’t even know the sentence you’re referring, but if you think it is wrong, I suggest you take it up with the ABC. But I was just getting a little sick of people latching on to wire-copy stories that do little more than report what someone said, in this case Brendan Nelson, and then fly off with accusations of bias.
On Wednesday week, I’m one of the guest speakers at a forum in Canberra on the internet and politics. I normally wouldn’t participate in a debate on reporting as I’ve done in the last day or two, but I thought I’d see what sensible response people could give about why Nelson’s remarks on whaling shouldn’t be reported. And in my view, most of what I got back was a lot of opinion. A few people like yourself responded having done some research, but most didn’t.
I’m cynical about the internet becoming a new wonderful forum for politics. It still strikes me as being the new talk-back radio and not nearly as influential in politics as it keeps being made out to be. It might have more power in America, where it can dominate primary elections, but I really think it is not as influential in Australia because compulsory voting means that the active people who surf for news are greatly outweighed by the passive majority who use the more traditional media outlets.
Now that Doug mentions the Board, I’d like to see Antony or any other ABC journalist defend the position of Janet Albrechtsen as a Board member.
To be in a position of responsibility over an organization that she has accused of being biased is bad enough. To be so blatantly biased herself, in the opposite direction to that which she accuses the ABC of being biased, in such a public forum as Australia’s only national newspaper, is true hypocrisy of the highest order.
She has her right to her personal opinions. She has no right to be BOTH an ABC Board member and to so stridently express those opinions in public.
She should choose and choose fast.
MartTwain @134. That vast numbers of people read, watch and listen to absolute pap, is for me a source of concern more than anything, that vast swathes of people can be manipulated by propaganda is always in the back of my mind. Now you can call me paranoid, but there are still Holocaust survivors alive, there are people here from across the planet, who bear terrible physical and psychological scars from regimes who manipulated their populations to make possible such actions. While I appreciate what Antony and others have to say about the difficulties and vagaries of life reporting in a hothouse environment, I think the public broadcaster has a particular responsibility to ensure balanced reporting. Others have given many examples of where this seems to come adrift by the ABC. I certainly have sought to understand what may be going on and why. To suggest that most people complaining here just hate journalists is just silly.
Antony @ 193. The problem for me is that what gets reported in what I understand to be the rolling news format, then gets reported in the bulletins, sometimes without attribution, and that that is the news. I literally heard a broadcaster on an arts program, prior to the election, censor herself on air about a politically sensitive subject because “We might get into trouble”. I don’t think anyone on the Board would dare to touch you, Antony, due to your reputation, however, there are cultures created within organisations that can become problematic. Do you seriously think anyone who works for Murdoch doesn’t understand exactly what is required without being told?
The organisation I work within has relatively recently had a new CEO appointed, who is a micromanager, par excellence. She’s obsessive and has changed the culture. I think what other commenters have been trying to point to, is that process determines outcomes, and what I’m trying to understand and point to, is changing culture, shifting process, and therefore, outcomes.
Bushy @ 194. I don’t think Antony or any other employee of the ABC should be expected to defend the lovely Janet’s appointment to the Board. They didn’t make the appointment, therefore, they don’t bear responsibility. Do be sensible and go get a glass of wine.
I honestly believe the internet will kill off the print media one day. It might take a decade or two but it will happen.
Is the media biased – probably not.
Is the media lazy – most definately.
Journalists have forgotten what journalism means – they seem to want to be opinion leaders – they aspire to be Milnes or Pies or Ulhmans.
Why research a story if AAP says its true? Why not reproduce a press release verbatim? Surely the authors would have verified the “facts”?
I had this discussion with marktwain before the election – she defends her profession of course.
But with possible changes to defamation law being mooted they may have to get their collective lazy backsides back into shape.
I have not only worked for the ABC but SBS and Channels 7,9 and 10.
Antony
please please keep expressing the view that the internet is largely irrelevant to politics
i mean phampleteering and leaflets were decried in their day werent they
Bushfire Bill, I didn’t appoint the board, so why ask me to justify it’s appointment.
The internet’s not irrelevant, but then neither is talk back radio.
Antony
you knucklehead
menzies used radio to totally destroy labors more traditional town hall approach
which btw was used succesfully by lyons
cf canada 1993 and the use of leaflets and ‘underground’ media to rout the kim campbell gvt
oh and also the french revolution and the use of flyers(phamplets)
but thats only my opinion
I’d go one further than ruawake – the MSM isn’t biased (although the Op-Ed sections are filled to the brim with dross), a lot of its lazy – but it’s a laziness brought about because the companies are getting exactly what they pay for on the one hand, and the extreme growth in the volume of press releases and general news “stuff” that they have to now deal with. That last bit shouldnt be underestimated – the newscycle has accelerated, the info has done likewise, but revenues haven’t – more work for less people getting, on average, paid less in real terms.
And the reason they arent paying much for the actual on the ground news work anymore comes back to eyeballs and the, in real terms, loss of eyeballs that the MSM print and broadcast editions are experiencing.
Which gets into Antony’s points (have fun at that Microsoft do Antony – I was invited to that thing, but anonymous marsupials and all) -the internet isn’t necessarily going to be a better quality forum for politics (although in some places it most certainly will, but in some places it will be worse), but it is the medium that is changing everything, including eyeball flow and the revenue consequences for MSM operations.
The net by its very nature is a high volume, low profit per eyeball affair compared to print. With less money to throw around, aspiring journos get the short end of the stick in financial compensation relative to the days of yore.So for young people that might have ordinarily moved into journalism – any of them with any get up and go, got up and left at the first opportunity to go and work in the broader communications field which pays more.
Where the MSM is getting a hit is in their good quality journalism – the area that used to carry the broadsheets in terms of reputation and branding, because that mix of facts and serious interpretation isn’t much of an economically viable proposal these days – not on the interpretation side (that’s cheap), but on the vertical integration of that with in house collected facts (the expensive part). Single journalists are now carrying the branding can for the masthead they work for – like George Meg does at the Oz. Where once the organisation has money to burn on that, these days it’s more about single journalists with neuerons to burn doing the job, but without the resources.
The facts, as in the news facts, are out there and easily accessible to anyone (the big change that the internet has created – especially with the growth in news wire services internationally) which means on any given issue, there’s a specialist out there somewhere that interprets it better than just about anyone in the media can because, well, they’re actually specialists in the field at hand. So many of the high value media consumers have ditched the MSM for greener, cheaper pastures (the top end of the net for serious stuff and online MSM for free, run of the mill news)
Now this doesn’t mean much for John and Mary citizen – but the Mr and Mrs Citizens never read the top end of the broadsheets anyway.
So the MSM is actually losing eyeballs from the top (because why pay for media when there’s better stuff out there than the usual suspects), as well as the bottom end (people often purchased papers not for the news but for the fluff in between which is now free and even more fluffy).
The result in Australia is a sort of middling of mediocrity of the mainstream press – not enough money to finance news reporting properly and no real capability to keep the non-news readers from going to the net (which was important from a cross-subsidisation perspective).
The net has already changed everything, especially in terms of the dramatic change in MSM business models – and it’s only going to get worse for them over time as an ever growing majority of people become comfortable using the net.The MSM has moved to the net, but they find it hard to monetize their presence properly because their business models don’t seem to be working too well on the one hand, and the people that use the net have very low opinions of the MSM as any Morgan poll on the publics views on professions over the last 3 years will tell you.
Crikey is already a functional business model – but the only real net centric service around (for now) in Australia and it’s still a web 1.0 model (pardon the cliche)
That will inevitably change.
The day that someone in Australia figures out a workable business model for something like the Huffington Post but with a better quality community relations bent (which, in Australia you have to have or you fail as a media organisation), well, it will be “the end of the beginning of the end” for the newspaper business model in this country.
And it will happen in the next couple of years.
Centre @199. You are entirely right. But the problem currently being faced is who will then pay to produce news. Newspaper news is funded by print advertising. Once that advertising goes, who pays for the news. To date, the only Australian on-line news service that has worked without being attached to a media organisation has been Crikey, and that worked because it was subscription e-mail, not free on-line. Even Crikey is now attached to Eric Beecher’s media organisation.
Through my NSW history research at http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/resources/nswelectionsanalysis/HomePage.htm, I’ve immersed myself in 150 years of Sydney Morning Herald reporting. Up until the 1920s, it was a journal of record, something you utterly rely on know the events of the day. Until 1880, there was no Hansard of the NSW parliament, and the SMH is the only record of earlier debates. There were no publications of 19th century NSW election results, the only sources are the published results in the newspapers.
That role changed once more official publications were produced. It changed again once radio and television news came along. And it is having to change with the internet as well. But the real test for journalism in the future is how to make people pay for it once it is no longer paid for by advertising. As William who runs this site has found, or Bryan Palmer at OzPolitics, or Peter Brent at Mumble, you put a lot of effort into a site like this, and you don’t make any money.
Antony and Snapper, what I meant was if the ABC is so ub-biased, how come such a proud and (worse) loud right-wing Amazon is alowed on the board?
It’s not a good look look, especially when we hear that apart from the Board the rest of the ABC is apparently not biased, just too busy to work out the truth. Huh?
Any legal appointment is ‘allowed’ to be in the board. Your question is entirely rhetorical and the answer is in your question.
Thanks Antony, I feel important that coming from you.
Maybe in future most news will come directly from the organisations or sporting bodies or political parties web sites as it happens, and other web sites will be designed in a particular way to report and discuss that news ???
Centre, Possum posted at the same time as me and we obviously are both of similar minds on the topic.
I’m wearing my tin foil hat to protect me from Antony’s mind control beams.
Cheers Possum.
Left wingers can think, right-wingers prefer not to. Or Left wingers ‘get there’ by thinking, right-wingers get their by unthinking indoctrination. Well maybe not that cut and dry, but fun to say.
This interesting article in SCIAM.
Remembering that Liberal in the USA is the left wing of politics.
Scientific American Vol18 No6 December/January 08
People who describe themselves as being politically liberal can better suppress a habitual response when faced with situations in which that response is incorrect, according to research that used a simple cognitive test to compare liberal and conservative thinkers.
Tasks that requires such “conflict monitoring” also triggered more activity in the liberals anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region geared to detect and respond to conflicting information. Past research has shown that liberals and conservatives exhibit differing cognitive styles, with liberals being more tolerant of ambiguity and conservatives preferring more structure.
Whilst I respect the marsupial one immensely, saying that the MSM is not biased is just plain wrong. Now obviously, not ALL media is biased, there are stand outs like Michelle Grattan and others than have been mentioned here, but there are certain elements that are, and its not just in the opinion columns. Witness the reports in the face of the 57/43 no-change Newspoll, or the coverage of Rudd and Japan. Surely you cant say this has been unbiaised. And Shanahan’s desparate spinning or Milne’s or Ackerman’s- UNBIASED? I dont think so.
Kina
You’ll be pleased to know that research also shows that conservative voters have more nightmares than liberals. In general, conservatives see the world in Manichean terms, ie good and evil. Liberals are more nuanced.
Dio, all well and good, but plenty of left-wingers have a pretty “good and evil” world view (as exhibited at PB, though not by your good self of course).
Then again, plenty of left-wingers are not particularly liberal in the traditional sense of the word “liberal”.
I thought Bush and Howard, the dreams come true, would have silenced those nightmares, well maybe delayed them to now.
Andrew – that’s mostly the Op-Eders that carry on with that nonsense. One of the problems with opinion pieces in the nations media is that they are replacing, in terms of quantity, ordinary news coverage.
So more of what we see and hear is that sort of Op-Ed stuff compared to what we used to (mainly because it’s cheaper to produce than real news coverage), and that really is where a lot of the bias comes in.
That growth in opinionated news coverage is an unfortunate thing that we’ll probably all have to get used to – simply because of the cost benefits of it as far as your average commercial media organisation is concerned.
Although – editors these days seem to be running fairly opinionated headlines atop a story that usually says nothing like the headline suggested. That shits me to tears and is something that, for instance, the ABC should probably pay more attention to (even if the pay is rotten)
I am wondering that if Obama wins the Presidency if he will repay Howard’s kind gesture by making a visit here sometime around the next election. I suspect he would be a powerful positive symbol for Labor and Rudd. And just deserts for Howard.
Oh and see Obama’s response to McCain’s suggetion of a temporary halt in the federal gasoline tax.
WAYNE, Pa. – Democrat Barack Obama told voters Saturday he would push an aggressive economic agenda as president: cutting taxes for the middle class, raising taxes on the wealthy, pouring money into “green energy” and requiring employers to set up retirement saving plans for their workers.
Campaigning in Pennsylvania, a key battleground in the fall campaign, Obama said he would take a much more hands-on approach than would Republican John McCain. He again criticized McCain’s proposal for a temporary halt in the federal gasoline tax. It would “actually do real harm,” Obama said, by reducing revenue for road and bridge construction even as oil companies make record profits.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080614/ap_on_el_pr/obama_economy;_ylt=AqWIlk2Vui54Fmpquh3eguRsnwcF
Ooh, I better add – Shanas and Milne are pretty much the quintessential example of opinionated news coverage even when they’re not, per ce, in the Op-Ed section
I’m not really buying this laziness spin. Was it laziness which caused the media to ignore this Essential research poll until the same week they were fishing for some support for their ‘honeymoon is over’ agenda?
The most insidious episode of ‘laziness’ this year was the beat up about Kevin Rudd’s dinner with Brian Burke. On reporting this story, the media seemed to be suffering a severe case of malaise when reporting on the part of the story that involved 10 Perth-based journalists turning up to this dinner. Once Andrew Landeryou published the full email transcripts which involved the previously censored assessments of the journalists made by Brian Burke, the media seemed to become too lazy to report on the whole story, except for Milne of course who is the energizer bunny of journalism it seems.
216 Dyno
I think your terminology explains that contradiction. I should have used the terms “conservative” and “progressive” as those are the terms used in the studies, which all came from America. I agree they would be difficult to extrapolate to Australia. The Australian “hard” left barely exists in the US.
ruawake @ 200-
Why research a story if AAP says its true? Why not reproduce a press release verbatim? Surely the authors would have verified the “facts”?
As editor of a medical information site I get to see lots of press releases, usually written by someone with a good grasp of the subject, either the author(s) of a study, the publisher or someone from the research institution. So you’d expect these releases to accurately report the findings of the study, wouldn’t you? Sadly, very few do. Most make at least one claim that isn’t supported by the data and some are so at odds with the facts that you wonder if you’ve been mistakenly sent a release from another work entirely.
If that’s the case in science, I’d hate to think what passes for fact in news releases from the murky world of politics.
I personally think that the sacking of Andrew Carroll sent a poor message to the other workers in the ABC making them withdraw into their conservative little shells from which few in the ABC in Brisbane have ever emerged. I think it is significant that Antonio explained a while ago here that ABC online news is based in Brisbane and this could be the basis of the problem that flows throughout the ABC as a National Organisation.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/200502_s3.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/media/s690457.htm
I think the internet will be far less persuasive than newspapers/television in influencing people’s vote. People only read the papers, or watch the current affairs programs that agree with them.
The internet is infinitely better at catering for that. It’s the ultimate medium for telling you what you already know, or would rather is true.
netvegetable. Interesting proposition. Care to expand?
226 Fulvio only to say that internet caters to the self-absorbed. If you don’t like the analysis given to you by the MSM you can always find some other analysis, somewhere on the web. This way, it makes it far easier to never have to confront an unpalatable truth, so nobody ever need change their mind.
Emerson (the soccer player) given the identification line on ABC (WA) news tonight: Socceroos Medfielder (sic); Twice in one sentence a reporter referred to ‘West Australia’. You’re right, ruawake, they’re damned lazy.
If you’re referring to the same oral report I heard, Ozymandias, the reporter did not only say “West Australia” twice. Even worse, he actually transliterated it into the Hansonite “West Austraya”.
netvegetable, I don’t necessarily accept your premise that “people only read the papers, or watch the current affairs programs that agree with them.” I think the complaints of bias made on this blog alone about various papers/programs go some way to supporting a contrary view. People confront views they disagree with, but have to absorb them in order to meaningfully do so.
Papers/programs are watched if the subject interests the viewer and the viewer then accepts or disagrees with the contents. He/she did that anyway before the advent of the internet.
I agree however that you can find anything/any view you want on the internet and it is entirely possible to confine your viewing to sites supporting your idealogy. But you could do that with print media and television programs also if you were so minded, albeit with greater difficulty in this country if you accept the anecdotal evidence provided by the majority of our fellow bloggers.
Latest ACNielsen poll.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/rudd-urged-to-act-on-fuel-20080615-2qze.html
And the ACNeilson Poll on Leaders.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/nelson-polls-better-but-far-behind-pm-20080615-2qzq.html
Internet caters to the self-absorbed? Maybe for game players, youtubers and so on.
That people complain about bias shows they are aware of alternative interpretations and contexts for what is being presented and, that they are irked enough to go on about has got to be a good thing.
People who calmly accept whatever is printed for them or shown on tv as gospel are the ones needing to be made aware that there are alternative analysis. Better a complaining public than an ignorant one.
The role media plays in politics is just as critical a subject as any other aspect of politics since the media is the only way people receive information of what is happening and, what it all means according to the presenters analysis.
We ought to be over sensitive to media bias just as Oppositions are meant to be sensitive and keep the Govt honest and questioning them, so too the public should query and learn to question what comes out of media.
This is especially true where you have a higher concentration of media ownership and, also after a long time of one government which had formed some symbiotic relationships with the media, that persist.
To suggest people avoid the MSM because of not wanting to be confronted with unpalatable truths assumes the media is a purveyor of truth which, we have learned it is quite often not, only its versions of the truth. When MSM starts to push a version of ‘truth’ skewed to support one side on a regular basis then it devalues itself and is hardly worth paying too much attention to. To avoid it is not avoiding unpalatable truths, it is refusing to be taken for fools.
It also assumes people who complain are ignorant which I do not find to be true at all. It is also the nature of the human condition that those of like concerns gather together.
Also, just as the MSM is meant to question both sides of politics in the public domain so that we can understand the world, as well as keeping them ‘honest’ the public should be putting just as much pressure on media when they start to root for one side. There should be no bias in the MSM though it will always exist – it can be kept to a minimum maybe with an alert and complaining public – right or wrong.
A silent, unquestioning and compliant public is only an invitation to MSM to form their only little pravadas and xinhuas.
I reckon I religiously read every major Australian paper from all States every day for about 18 months up until January. It is not hard to pick up changes, campaigns, coordinated efforts when they occur and not hard to pick up systemic bias where it exists.
And on the contrary the internet is the opposite – it will often tell you things you never had a clue about before.
It is also interesting that the Member for Burnett who is increasingly looking to be in need of deep pockets and a good lawyer is a product of the dysfunctional ABC in Queensland. Before becoming a pollie he was another conservative ABC presenter.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/beattie-to-cmc-charge-him/2008/06/15/1213468207130.html
I don’t pretend to understand the machinations of setting world oil prices!
Is there anything the Rudd government can do, other than blow a hole in the surplus by cutting petrol excise, as Nelson argues?
Tough it out and get inflation under control is the best thing Rudd can do. Once inflation is back in the Reserve Bank’s target range then he can do what he likes.
Doubt we can influence world prices, set by increasing demand from China & India.
Can help by providing more/better public transport, improving roads so bottlenecks are removed. Congestion taxes to encourage move to public transport.
Electric cars would be good: 68% efficiency compared to 30% for ICE. Trolley buses instead of diesel buses, more trams, electric trains etc only long term way.
Oh Dear, the quicksand just got softer and deeper. Now the Member for Burnett is on about contempt of Parliament. No doubt a follow on from the suspension for 21 days of the Independent Member for Nicklin in the last sittings of the Queensland Parliament.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/16/2275453.htm
http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/view/committees/documents/MEPPC/reports/Report%2090.pdf
ABC going full-steam for a platform for Nelson.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/16/2275442.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/16/2275578.htm
That is an old trick – asking the govt to rule out future taxes changes on something. Obviously something you can never do.
Playing around with fuel price excise would be simply fiddling while Rome burned. Going to need to get the oldies out of retirement to drive more buses.
Wonder if the media is going to put any focus on the full effect of cutting fuel excise?
There is one benefit for the government in this – they can say they will delay a carbon tax on oil fuel since world prices are doing the job anyway.
ACNielsen – With the “honeymoon” that keeps on keeping on.
The Nielsen poll is crap- apart from the fact that a 56/44 if a wipeout, you would expect a large % of voters at a time of record petrol prices to say they’d like cheaper petrol- not rocket science. How about asking if its ok to take $2b out of services to pay for the 5 cent decrease.
Rudd’s problem though is the opposition with support of the MSM are going to bang on endlessly about this issue (they’re on a winner and there isnt much else for them to target), and he’s going to have to do more at some stage.
RX
Brenda needs all the help he can get, he’s got no policies so has to cling to the negative msm headlines to keep from drowning.
Obama has the right idea with his “fightthesmears.com”
The GOOD thing for Labor is it means (1) Nelson stays and (2) The opposition dont do the soul-searching and make fundamental changes to make them an alternative government
If the punters were presented with a poll like: Which would you perfer a 5c, 10c, or 15c reduction, which do you think they would go for?
You are right Andrew – “you would expect a large % of voters at a time of record petrol prices to say they’d like cheaper petrol- not rocket science.”
The government is offering a system which at best will reduce petrol by a small margin, under 5c. So anyone offering 5c will be favoured, but I bet it’s not what the punters really want. They’ll want 30c or more to be satisfied and how does anyone do that and remain financially responsible?
#224 Steve
I think you’re drawing a rather long bow to think that locating ABC Online in Brisbane has turned it into some conservative mouthpiece.
Antony and Possum have made some very good contributions to this debate about the role of MSM vs internet.
I do not think newspapers or magazines of radio stations etc will die out because of the internet, but they will definitely change, partly, as Possum says, in order to stay commercially viable. We will get media organisations where their websites and publications work in tandem.
And as for Bushfire Bill’s comments about Janet Albrechtson – asking ABC staff to justify her board position – what a stupid thing. She’s there because the Coalition Government appointed her. John Bannon was on the board because a Labor Government appointed HIM. It would be nice to think that Labor will establish a non-political method of appointing the ABC Board, as it has promised, but nothing has happened yet. Don’t hold your breath.
On a side issue, raised by Possum, that some ABC web headlines don’t accurately fit the stories, and may appear biased….
That’s a fair point. Remember that the ABC, until recently, was a radio/TV organisation, and generally did not write headlines at all (except for one or two items as “teasers” for major TV or radio news bulletins). Headline-writing is new to the ABC, and an astonishing amount have to be written – the ABC produces for more stories (albeit in shorter form) every day than the MSM newspaper outlets, with international, national, state, specialist and regional stories all requiring headliens to be written quickly for the web. The ABC does need to improve its headline writing.
Also, these days there’s little opportunity for MSM (including ABC) headline writers to be creative sub-editors. Web headlines tend to be boring, because they’re designed for search engines to find the story, rather than to attract a reader’s attention. Take it from me – the life of a sub-editor is more tedious and less creative than it used to be.
I would like to see a few Poll Bludgers write four-word accurate and non-biased headliens on their comments, and see how they go!
steve at 205, the stark political reality is the Rudd is MILES ahead of the polls, so there is no need to do anything about petrol right now. As the next election draws closer, if the polls tighten and oil prices dont settle, I think they would do something like cut the GST on excise.
should read “headlines” of course – good thing the sub picked it up…
Anyone else find it hilarious that Nelson is more popular with Labor voters than Coalition voters?
#250
Actaully, it makes sense – Labor voters are more keen to keep him as Opposition Leader.
where will Smirks 37% go when he quits?
At 203
Antony Green Says:
June 15th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
The internet’s not irrelevant, but then neither is talk back radio.
If you listened to talk back radio jocks and callers before the election, you would have sworn that Howard was going to win comfortably. At least the internet through sites like this and Crikey gave an alternative, and I think a more realistic viewpoint given Howard lost.
And Michelle Grattan proves her worth by acknowleding the ALP lead in the headline: Nelson polls better but far behind PM. Wonder what Shameaham would have gone with??
The Neilsen Poll is good and nothing has really changed. 2PP well within MoE. I couldn’t help but compare in my mind the sober, analytical way Michelle Grattan goes about dealing with the poll results and the hysterical, fanciful way Shannahan does the Newspoll.
The petrol price problem shows how bias of MSM can affect people’s thinking. Imagine people preferring a 5c fuel tax cut to Fuelwatch where the actual savings in knowing the cheapest fuel would be far nmore than the av 2c/lr save as in WA. It would be interesting to see what the poll results would be in WA. Rudd is having trouble because of MSM getting his message across re long term effects.
Saying that Labor really has to find a more effective way of managing the media, especially when plastic man Nelson just follows populist trends without any geuine policies.
It also indicates to me that most voters who are addicted to BS progammes like TT/CA really do not want to think at all about the proper issues and will not forsake a couple of dollars in the pocket now for a future benefit. This is what makes populist issues so dangerous in the short term.
Rudd has to stick to his guns. He is riding high in the polls and inflation will be more dangerous to him later on when it matters around election time than this problem with petrol prices. I believe high interest rates will be more deadly to him than high petrol prices. He was elected to govern, not to be popular all the time. Let Nelson try to worry about that.
I have hopes that a steady head will prevail.
New thread.