Snake_Baker
The one true King of the North
- Apr 24, 2013
- 81,024
- 153,191
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Essendon Lawn Bowls Club
- Banned
- #926
It's pretty simple mate. You choose, you pay. In the minds of sane people this is normal behavior.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
It's pretty simple mate. You choose, you pay. In the minds of sane people this is normal behavior.
You involuntarily pay them via the advertising levy on virtually every single product or service you buy.Not to me, or plenty of others either, but thanks for considering how money taken from me should be spent on my behalf.
AS for the "private ones", I don't pay them a cent, but at least I get to make that choice.
You involuntarily pay them via the advertising levy on virtually every single product or service you buy.
Quite correct.Which I CHOOSE!
No one chooses this on my behalf!
Try to get this simple concept through your thick head.
The trouble is Snake, 'user pays' helps rich folks, as do tax cuts and are the main reasons the gap between the rich and poor has got so bad. A big part of our fracturing society is related to the blow out of that gap.It's pretty simple mate. You choose, you pay. In the minds of sane people this is normal behavior.
The trouble is Snake, 'user pays' helps rich folks, as do tax cuts and are the main reasons the gap between the rich and poor has got so bad. A big part of our fracturing society is related to the blow out of that gap.
Isnt that mostly the case though? On the news shows and newsbulletins the news reader is usually always too stupid to actually have a political view so gives the story straight without an opinion. Its only on the other shows where we get news opinions.
[/QUO
Probably right too, but I can only emphasise what I am trying to say by looking at the weather news, if its going to be very hot, you don't say but it could snow, if your reporting from Alice Springs? I know that sounds a bit silly but if you get news driven by a hosts opinion, then it should be described as an opinion , not news. So what you say about a 1/2 hour news bulletin being pure news is correct.
I guess you could put that difference in an argument to say that Insiders (ABC) is opinion with some news factors added, and The Bolt Report (SKY) is the same thing, but crikey you can see the two differences.
I find the ABC is nearly always putting oposites down instead of reporting, people find Bolt extreme to the right, but I actually see him as biased on some issues strongly, and on other mostly even minded, and he doesn't shy away from his opinions , only when ABC challenges him, on nearly everything , lots of it hypocritical.
On the other hand the ABC is so blatantly out there with its bias, that the question is about ABC.
And SBS for me is not so much to worry about, they cater for minorities I suppose and migrants which is fine
But ABC is meant to be the representative of the cross section of Australia, and should be a service, not opinionated and definitely a left-leaning operation at the moment with no control over it, even Ita has no say!?
I think they need new legislation for the national broadcaster, because we pay for it, and they do go to the limit of bias, they are meant to be there for all Australians, they are somewhat like GetUp, I subscribed to once who told me they were a cross section of all community opinions, they were so far from that I told them had a couple of emails from them which I returned vigorously, then I got chucked. Because they were false! And a wing of the ALP, probably.
When your national broadcaster starts to feel like that its time for the gov to step in and have a closer look.
The ABC is, realistically, center left but has always been like that as far as I can remember. That's not due to any great mystery but rather because it employs professional journalists and most of them would roll that way as a professional group. There's no real comparison with the commercial press from a journalistic perspective - commercial television isn't really interested in, for example, investigative journalism because it's not of financial benefit. It's also beholden to mandate of its owners. Ultimately this why we still need the ABC because it exists to serve the national interest. Ultimately when something serious serious goes down, like the bush fires, you turn on the grown up channel, rather than watch a Stephanovic or some muppet from better homes telling you what's going on.
Yes! A board that is accountable to only itself, is not a broadcaster for the people at all. In fact thats a whole different story right there , they just roll on with no one to answer to? And we pay for it!I feel "News" should be a defined legal term. Where opinion creeps into "News", it should be clear we have shifted from facts to opinion.
Infotainment should not be included within News.
Personally I believe the ABC and SBS should be limited to News or entertainment programs. I don't wish for the government to waste tax payer funds on infotainment especially if it is political.
Further I would hope the ABC become more accountable one day, where the board exert authority over content. Having a broadcaster that isn't even accountable to the board is a joke.
Yes! A board that is accountable to only itself, is not a broadcaster for the people at all. In fact thats a whole different story right there , they just roll on with no one to answer to? And we pay for it!
Compare the ABC life saving coverage of the apocalyptic bushfires compared to the Murdoch press. Murdoch's rags continuously ran a line to diminish the bushfires, presumably because of the need to deny climate change. It was pathetic. It was wrong. Then they attacked the job the ABC was doing. Many people affected thanked the ABC for their accurate coverage and some even said it was a life saver. Uncomfortable facts for those who want to knife aunty. Murdoch is not your friend.
but your post raise the issue..............
You claim Murdoch was reducing the significance to distance bush fire from climate change. What News is about isn't about reporting a fire or linking it to or distancing it from climate change, rather simply reporting the facts about a fire.
When and only when a full independent report is completed about the fire should climate change, back burning, the use of carcinogenic chemicals, the explosion of gum trees dominating our landscape and land care management systems be introduced.
However Murdoch (ie the ABC) was not alone by creating and reporting sensationalism.
We shouldn't be calling to keep or close the ABC because of what Murdoch did or didn't do. Rather we should look at the quality of product of the ABC and assess if it is something people value. If people value it, then having an organisation standing on its own two feet is completely reasonable.
If people value it, then having an organisation standing on its own two feet is completely reasonable.
Yes you do Uncle Rupert runs the Oz as a tax deductible propaganda arm for the Libs it cost 20 mill a year in lost taxes he deducts from other venturesNot to me, or plenty of others either, but thanks for considering how money taken from me should be spent on my behalf.
AS for the "private ones", I don't pay them a cent, but at least I get to make that choice.
Which I CHOOSE!
No one chooses this on my behalf!
Try to get this simple concept through your thick head.
Kept us "alive and safe" during the bush fires........................
If there is to be a rationalisation it should include commercial operations too. It's becoming ludicrous. Television and radio.I must admit, although I love both SBS and the ABC, ever since we shifted to digital I have thought there should be a bit of an overhaul and rationalisation of public television. Currently we have nine different channels - SBS, SBS Viceland, SBS Food, SBS World Movies, NITV, ABC, ABC News, ABC Comedy/Kids and ABC Me. It's very clear that there is nowhere near enough good local content to justify that many.
A huge amount of the content on SBS, SBS Viceland and SBS Food is just recycled crap from America that hardly fits the mission of a multicultural broadcaster. NITV is a great initiative, but again its broadcast schedule is massively padded due to a shortfall of local indigenous content. SBS World Movies is great but whether we really need a 24/7 publically-funded movie channel is highly questionable.
ABC and ABC News are great, but ABC Me seems totally unnecessary when you already have ABC Kids running from 5am to 7:30pm on another channel. I'd also question whether we have enough good local comedy to justify a full night block, every night (particularly when there's also a fair slab of comedy on the main channel).
It seems to me that you could save a hell of a lot of money by cutting back to six channels' worth of content, flogging off leases on the extra licences for some cash, and merging the two entities to pool back office resources for TV, radio and online.
Preferably the savings can then be used to focus on the stuff we actually rely on public broadcasting for - i.e. high-quality news, locally-produced and indigenous content, and multicultural and multilingual programming.