Society/Culture Which is the best unbiased media outlet in Australia?

[Number37]

How many right commentators host ABC shows again? How many people were advocating the no vote mate. You're deluded at best.

Whether a reporter/presenter is right or left or centre they should ALL be reporting facts with balance.
Whether something is a fact or not, does not depend on the political leanings of the person stating that fact.

 

[evolved2]

To anyone who says the ABC is left of centre in their reporting, I ask - what right wing perspectives should they consider that they currently aren't, and on what issues?

Equally valid:

To anyone who says the ABC is right of centre in their reporting, I ask - what left wing perspectives should they consider that they currently aren't, and on what issues?

 

[Malifice]

Equally valid:

To anyone who says the ABC is right of centre in their reporting, I ask - what left wing perspectives should they consider that they currently aren't, and on what issues?

No-one is saying they're right of center though.

We're saying that for a 'left wing news agency' they have 50 percent right wingers on their shows.

Can Sky news (or even Nine etc) make the same claim?

I mean come on. Even the most fervent conservative can see that Fox/ Sky and most of Murdochs 'news' companies are just a mouthpiece for his own political views, and most of what they say is heavily biased towards whatever benefits the owner.

 

[evolved2]

No-one is saying they're right of center though.

We're saying that for a 'left wing news agency' they have 50 percent right wingers on their shows.

Can Sky news (or even Nine etc) make the same claim?

I mean come on. Even the most fervent conservative can see that Fox/ Sky and most of Murdochs 'news' companies are just a mouthpiece for his own political views, and most of what they say is heavily biased towards whatever benefits the owner.

I don't waste my time with Sky news or Fox. News.com.au is good for entertainment in tea breaks.

The ABC is well balanced right now, and seeing the extremities from both sides of politics upset over their broadcasting is a form of confirmation for me that they've got it about right.

Given the ABC is taxpayer funded, why do some lefties think it should be biased in their direction?

 

[Malifice]

Given the ABC is taxpayer funded, why do some lefties think it should be biased in their direction?

None do.

What on earth gives you that idea?

 

[evolved2]

None do.

What on earth gives you that idea?

Some LW posters on the SRP have bemoaned the ABC for platforming too many RWNJ's.

 

[Gethelred]

Some LW posters on the SRP have bemoaned the ABC for platforming too many RWNJ's.

I think the issue there has more to do with some of the choices made by editors and management due to budget limitations than simply 'too many right wingers!' Ida brought with her an excessively simple formula when she became the director: here's the issue, here's what the right say, here's what the left say. It created absolute diametries, when each issue has more than two possible positions or sets of reasoning.

It's much easier to create, as it's cheaper and just requires access to the government or a relevant journalist/expert rather than an investigation team with experience and actual credibility. You also force people into a Coke/Pepsi mindset: it's always Labor vs Libs/Nats or Labor vs Greens. There's no room for a potential third, fourth or fifth perspective, and it's always completely adversarial; Ida saw QandA and thought that was the entirety of what the ABC could be.

It's also transforms the role of journalist into that of a mere signal booster instead of an uncoverer of truth; the old aphorism 'If one person says it's raining and the other person says it isn't, it isn't the job of the journalist to report both opinions but to pop your head out a window and check' doesn't hold true for the ABC anymore under this model.

It's a deconstruction of the concept of right and wrong, good outcomes and bad, in which everything can be shaped and reshaped by either mouthpiece reported and spun to their content.

It's so much more than just 'too many right wing panelists!'

 

[Number37]

Some LW posters on the SRP have bemoaned the ABC for platforming too many RWNJ's.

The problem isn't that they are RWNJs, the problem is that they ignore facts.

 

[faible]

It's usually the other way in my experience. How do you read the OP's political leaning from their posts in this thread?

I've seen the OP post elsewhere, this thread doesn't exist in a vacuum.

 

[Saab NLAW]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Fbiased-out-of-touch-time-for-qa-to-be-scrapped%2Fnews-story%2F20f068ffa27696e250ac11e8d704586f&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=LOW-Segment-2-SCORE&V21spcbehaviour=append

 

[Malifice]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Fbiased-out-of-touch-time-for-qa-to-be-scrapped%2Fnews-story%2F20f068ffa27696e250ac11e8d704586f&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=LOW-Segment-2-SCORE&V21spcbehaviour=append

So your argument as to why News Corp is 'more unbiased' than the ABC is an article where Murdoch literally uses News Corp to take a swipe at the ABC.

Facepalm.

 

[Saab NLAW]

So your argument as to why News Corp is 'more unbiased' than the ABC is an article where Murdoch literally uses News Corp to take a swipe at the ABC.

Facepalm.

Which argument are you referring to?

I'm sorry if I've offended you in some way with my views, I know it's confronting for some people to come across opinions that they may strongly disagree with.

 

[barreness]

Equally valid:

To anyone who says the ABC is right of centre in their reporting, I ask - what left wing perspectives should they consider that they currently aren't, and on what issues?

Perspectives- Socialism, anarchism, ecological, class analysis, Marxist analysis
Issues - anything that effects Australians material conditions, economic/political/cultural etc

ABC is liberal with a touch of diversity and feminism, standard corporate neolisberalism. Its A perspective but not left in a meaningful sense.

As a random example why is nationalisation of resources never discussed

 

[Malifice]

Which argument are you referring to?

The argument in the ****ing link, that you posted.

I presume you read the link?

I'm sorry if I've offended you in some way with my views, I know it's confronting for some people to come across opinions that they may strongly disagree with.

You're an alt account and I'm getting tired of you. Quickly.

Lift your game.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Perspectives- Socialism, anarchism, ecological, class analysis, Marxist analysis
Issues - anything that effects Australians material conditions, economic/political/cultural etc

ABC is liberal with a touch of diversity and feminism, standard corporate neolisberalism. Its A perspective but not left in a meaningful sense.

Absolutely, the ABC are not meaningfully left or right to any unbiased observer, from a news and current affairs perspective they're solely interested in broadcasting the propaganda of empire and protecting its interests.

There isn't a single article out of the ABC on anything which affects our ruling class' commercial interests or our military alliances which isn't full to the brim with easily provable lies and/or obviously intellectually dishonest 'sins of omission', and/or blatantly obvious double standards for choice of language employed.

The truly shocking thing is how few people realise it and think 'Aunty' is mostly telling them the truth, albeit with a slight 'leftist' twist.

 

[tandino]

If you listen to commentators like Friendly Jordies

Definitely no bias there.

 

[evolved2]

Perspectives- Socialism, anarchism, ecological, class analysis, Marxist analysis
Issues - anything that effects Australians material conditions, economic/political/cultural etc

ABC is liberal with a touch of diversity and feminism, standard corporate neolisberalism. Its A perspective but not left in a meaningful sense.

As a random example why is nationalisation of resources never discussed

In the same sense, could one argue the ABC doesn't broadcast a meaningful perspective from the right?

 

[spinynorman]

I'm not sure best media outlet and most unbiased media outlet is the same thing. I tend to find Fairfax pretty good for breaking news, maybe Crikey for editorial and investigative?

ABC and SBS are centre right in their coverage. They appear "left-wing" because the rest of the media is much to the right of that. The ABC attempts to find the centre as being in between Labor and Liberal, but I don't think anyone who is politically educated in a broader sense would accept that as where the centre lies. SBS will always take the view of the Global North in its coverage of world news.

In the same sense, could one argue the ABC doesn't broadcast a meaningful perspective from the right?

I think the "standard corporate neoliberalism" described by barreness is a right wing perspective. I would say it definitely has a bias against conservatism but it certainly gives more of an airing of that ideology than it does socialism, for example.

 

[barreness]

In the same sense, could one argue the ABC doesn't broadcast a meaningful perspective from the right?

Sorry i'm late to this, yes

They could discuss fascism, eugenics, surveillance state, whats the signals department up to, attempted religious takeovers
I would really love this, open air ya know, disinfectant

I'm being rude though, lets talk about classic liberalism and how its being subverted, because this has merit and its being destroyed(coming from a filthy commie)

anyway, 'socialism or barbarism'

 

[barreness]

I should say, I've stopped watching ABC a few months after Ita took charge

We're all propagandists but it just got ugly

Used to love lateline but that changed well before her time

 

[Malifice]

lets talk about classic liberalism and how its being subverted

Classic liberalism has been dead for centuries.

Social liberalism is the name of the game now. It's an evolution from classical liberalism (libertarianism) and actually has logical underpinnings.

Unlike Socialism (which doesnt work and creates tyrannies) and libertarianism which allows tyrannies of a different sort to flourish.

 

[barreness]

Classic liberalism has been dead for centuries.

True, was it ever really alive

Social liberalism is the name of the game now. It's an evolution from classical liberalism (libertarianism) and actually has logical underpinnings.

It sounds good in theory, but we've ended up in a corporate tyranny of sorts

Unlike Socialism (which doesnt work and creates tyrannies) and libertarianism which allows tyrannies of a different sort to flourish.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, I think its been defeated rather than doesn't work imo
Dictatorship of the proletariat is the only acceptable outcome.

 

[Malifice]

It sounds good in theory, but we've ended up in a corporate tyranny of sorts

How so?

Explain to me how Jeff Bezos controls anything in your life at all? What is it exactly that billionaires and Corporations are not allowing you to do with your life?

Name one single thing.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, I think its been defeated rather than doesn't work imo
Dictatorship of the proletariat is the only acceptable outcome.

You say 'socialism doesnt end it a tyranny' and then literally the next words out of your mouth are 'dictatorship of the proletariat.'

Socialism always ends in a tyranny. Heck, it starts with a tyranny, because when the State control everything, the State controls everything.

 

[barreness]

How so?

Explain to me how Jeff Bezos controls anything in your life at all? What is it exactly that billionaires and Corporations are not allowing you to do with your life?

Name one single thing.

Ok, this is kind of a big topic and I won't be able to cover it all at once. Bezos is a good example though, he's a rent seeker in the techno world, many a small manufacturer has to pay their piece to bezo to get on the lists that the algorithm serves up(techno feudalism by yanis varoufakis if you want a far better explanation that i can give) to drive the consumption of you and me.

But generally, corps own everything, you cannot escape the bubble, monopolies rein supreme.
They own the states resources which means the commonwealth can't be diverted to human need, only profit

What can't I do? live in the bush with a communal group like humans do

You say 'socialism doesnt end it a tyranny' and then literally the next words out of your mouth are 'dictatorship of the proletariat.'

Socialism always ends in a tyranny. Heck, it starts with a tyranny, because when the State control everything, the State controls everything.

No, I meant the it doesn't work bit. Some form of hierarchy is inevitable, do you elect your boss?

But yes for Stalin=bad. Xi=well we'll see, I'm really not a fan of his dictatorial power grab, will probs end in tears

Do you have a power structure that doesn't end up monopolising? at least find a form that tries to benefits the people

 

[barreness]

How so?

Explain to me how Jeff Bezos controls anything in your life at all? What is it exactly that billionaires and Corporations are not allowing you to do with your life?

Name one single ting.

Oh yeh just another thing.

The corporate control of resources means they can't be nationalised, see what happens in a few south/central american states when they try. They get sued, pay or leave the global trade system. A states(people) resources aren't controlled in any democratic sense

You get ostricised or freedom delivered on the tip of a patriot missle