PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

Andu 29th Jan 2014 21:44

Watch for an absolutely over the top campaign citing "freedom of the press" and Australia becoming another North Korea if the Libs make any attempt to get the ABC back within their charter.

These people are so indelibly set into their "only we know what's best for the ignorant masses" Leftist world view they really don't believe that they're in any way biased. They simply know they're right.

I just heard one of them say on 702 Sydney: (Yes, guilty, yerhonn'r; I listen to them.) "What do they (the Libs) expect a national broadcaster to do? Report only what the "Dear Leader" says?"

Droll that, when you consider that for six years, until last September, that's damn near exactly what they were doing!

500N 29th Jan 2014 21:51

I think Abbott might do it anyway, one swift strike of the pen,
cut the budget out from under them, lefty temple destroyed :ok:

Well, one of them. He still has a few lefty temples to dismantle.


Edit
I listen to 774, Jon Faine in the car :rolleyes:

500N 29th Jan 2014 23:23

Now they think they know what the Agenda is re the ABC,
they are coming out fighting.

The fight has started but somehow I think it / the ABC has already lost it.

Stripping ABC of contract would be a petty attack by Abbott: Tanya Plibersek

Tanya Plibersek has defended the ABC against Tony Abbott's attacks and the speculated termination of the broadcaster's $223 million Australia Network contract.
The Prime Minister's attacks on the ABC, in which he accused the broadcaster of lacking sufficient patriotism in its journalism, were now escalating into a "petty tit-for-tat exchange" which threatened the ABC's soft diplomacy arm, Ms Plibersek said.
"Before the election, the government were very clear that they wouldn't be cutting funding to the ABC.
Advertisement
"And today we read in the newspapers that they're proposing to cut almost a quarter of a billion dollars from the ABC at what seems to be a very petty tit-for-tat exchange with our national broadcaster".
Ms Plibersek was responding to a News Corp report that the Abbott cabinet would strip the ABC of its Australia Network contract.
Unnamed cabinet ministers were reported as believing that the ABC's coverage of Australia in the region was "overly negative and fails to promote the nation as originally intended in the Australia Network's charter".
These anonymous ministerial opinions mirror Mr Abbott's public attack on the ABC on Ray Hadley's 2GB radio show on Wednesday.
Alluding to the ABC's recent reporting on Edward Snowden leaks and torture allegations against the Australian navy, the Prime Minister said Australians expected the ABC to show "some basic affection for the home team".
The ABC "instinctively takes everyone's side but Australia's," Mr Abbott added.
On Thursday, the morning after Mr Abbott's attack on the ABC, The Austra-lian published a story speculating on the termination of the ABC's Australia Network.
The Australia Network is Australia's international television service, broadcast into 46 countries across Asia, the Pacific and Indian subcontinent. The network, which was established in 2001, is funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
In 2011, the Gillard government controversially awarded the contact to the ABC in perpetuity after overruling then foreign minister Kevin Rudd, who wanted the contract to go to Sky News. Sky News Australia is part owned by Britain-based pay-TV company BSkyB, which is controlled by 21st Century Fox, a sister company to News Corp.
Mr Abbott was intent on attacking the ABC because he was unhappy about being scrutinised by its journalists, Ms Plibersek suggested, in a press conference held on Thursday morning at Parliament House, Canberra.
"Our national broadcaster has played a very important role in Australia for many decades," she said.
"It's very disappointing that the minute the new government gets any scrutiny it starts looking for someone to blame and proposes attacking the ABC with a very substantial cut to its funding."

Flying Binghi 30th Jan 2014 00:16

Craig Laundy outs himself as a muppet..:hmm:

Free speech is fine though the ABC costs us taxpayers over one billion dollars a year...

"...Mr Turnbull's comments were supported by Liberal western Sydney MP Craig Laundy, who posted a spirited defence of free speech on Facebook on Thursday morning, arguing that if people did not like the ABC's work, they could change the channel.
''There are many great things about living in a democracy - one of them the luxury of free speech,'' he posted..."


Malcolm Turnbull defends ABC after Tony Abbott's attack

"if people did not like the ABC's work, they could change the channel..." ...or even turn it off.. permantly..:hmm:











.

500N 30th Jan 2014 00:20

They are coming out of the woodwork now.

Another article has just appeared on The Age web site.

You have to love the headline on this one :O

Ignore the hysteria: it's time we privatised the tone deaf, left-leaning ABC

Airey Belvoir 30th Jan 2014 00:30


One rather suspects that Sky will be rubbing their hands at the thought of getting the overseas broadcasting contract.

You heard it on here first folks!!!

500N 30th Jan 2014 00:35

Yes, and what is interesting is, both the Sky link and the ABC funding link
were posted on here within a few hours of TA's attack on the ABC.

The media took 24 or more hours to publish it, those links.

A very astute mob you lot are :O :ok:

Captain Dart 30th Jan 2014 00:41

I may be able to turn off, or change channel on the ALPBC, but I am still paying for it.

500N 30th Jan 2014 00:48

That is a very good point indeed.

And if we are paying for it, then we should have a say in what it does,
and does not do.


Or if they don't like that, cut the funding off or as per the article, privatise it.

Pinky the pilot 30th Jan 2014 01:22


or as per the article, privatise it.
That is something I really would not like to see, 500N purely for the reason that then we would not have a free to air station that does not have six or more adverts every eight or so minutes!:ugh::yuk:

At least the (formerly advert free) SBS does not appear to be as bad as the main commercial networks.

Though I will admit that the 'station promos' the ABC shows between programs can be a little annoying. However, I regard that as a small price to pay.

IMHO, all that is needed is a bit of a 'clean out.' The fact that even some in the Media are now using the term ALPBC to describe the organisation speaks volumes!

How the clean out is achieved though is something to be resolved by others.:hmm:

500N 30th Jan 2014 01:41

"The fact that even some in the Media are now using the term ALPBC to describe the organisation speaks volumes !"


Yes, I noticed that.

A shift has occurred.

Airey Belvoir 30th Jan 2014 02:33

Be careful....there's obviously a meedja mole on here!!

Andu 30th Jan 2014 02:38

Pinky, I share your feelings about having a non-commercial network. However, I disagree emphatically with your "it only needs a clean out" comment. Let me use an example from recent history to illustrate why. Most of remember the Global Financial Crisis and the way Our Kevin (among others) "saved" us from it. One of the ways Kevin (and others) saved us was by guaranteeing the major banks' depositors' funds.

So instead of all those employees and directors working in the banking industry having to clear out their desks and go through the very humbling process of being out of work before finding another job - another job with a whole new set of ground rules where all the lurks, perks - (and bonuses, bonuses and more bonuses) - and other bad practices those employees had become used to in their current jobs, this government bailout allowed all those employees to stay in their 'safe zone', where they knew all the rules - and those rules and practices could be maintained.

So what did they do? After suffering billions of dollars in losses, taking billions of dollars from the taxpayer to keep afloat - they gave themselves huge bonuses! Because that was what had become common practice - everyone "deserved" a bonus every year until it became an expected part of the annual salary.

If the A(LP)BC is allowed to remain in any guise, a similar situation will prevail in any "new, reduced" core ABC. They are totally convinced that they are the enlightened ones, the only ones who can unravel the complicated inputs that make up the news and turn it into an understandable, (in their eyes) CORRECT AND IMPARTIAL version of events, even though the Great Rednecked Unwashed* out there - (that's us) - might find it unpalatable. (For what would the GRU* know? They're just not intelligent enough to understand what's good for them - only the Enlightened Ones - the ALPBC staffers - are clever enough to see through all the verbiage and come up with a proper version of the News We All Need To Hear.

I don't have a problem with there being such people out there in medialand. As someone who is not - and never will be - as 'enlightened' as they are, I just object to bankrolling them from my taxes.

500N 30th Jan 2014 03:12

I was just having a glance at an article about AS and the tightening
of rules that can have them returned to detention from the community.

"People on bridging visas have extremely limited work rights and receive less than $250 a week in welfare payments. They can wait up to five years to have their refugee status determined under the ''no advantage test'' introduced by the former Labor government.

"for more than 20,000 irregular immigrants living in the community on bridging visas."

Let's say $250 for ease of calculating
x 20,000 people
$12,500,000 a WEEK
$50,000,000 a MONTH
$600,000,000 a A YEAR

And that is just the money paid out to them a year, not including all the
costs of administering it all.

That is huge number, I didn't realise it was so big.


Ken Borough 30th Jan 2014 04:12

There is some breathtaking hypocrisy here! Hate the ABC and Fairfax Media when they criticise the right but support and quote them when it suits your PoV.

The Age article suggesting privatization of the ABC is a load of crap. It was penned by one of the head honchos of that far right wing organization, the Institute of Public Affairs. It reportedly (because it won't state its sources of funding) is patronized by, inter alia, those great Australian and American icons of good sense, Ms Rhinehart and one Rupert Murdoch. The IPA is a great mouthpiece for the tobacco industry as well as being climate sceptics and is very influential in the upper echelons of the Liberal Party. It is not what it seems. It has agenda that scares the socks of thinking, fair-minded decent Australians.

Clare Prop 30th Jan 2014 04:14

"The federal government is introducing a behaviour code for people on bridging visas which warns they must not disobey road rules, engage in sexual conduct without consent or engage in bullying, disruptive, violent or criminal behaviour."

What you meant they have to behave like decent human beings now? Surely this will have SHY screaming racism and discrimination?

Read more: Asylum seekers warned against swearing, spitting and rumour mongering in draft code-of-conduct

500N 30th Jan 2014 04:22

"It has agenda that scares the socks of thinking, fair-minded decent Australians."

Just like the Greens and other lefties scare the crap out of a lot of fair-minded decent Aussies and businesses, those who generally work and pay tax to pay for all the welfare, green and Asylum seeker programs like my calculation below.

I wouldn't mind some of that money being paid to Aussies instead of AS.

"The Age article suggesting privatization of the ABC is a load of crap. It was penned by one of the head honchos of that far right wing organization, the Institute of Public Affairs."

At least it's private money.

As opposed to having the ALPBC speak on behalf of the left and far left
even though it is paid for by PUBLIC Gov't money.

Ken Borough 30th Jan 2014 05:06

500N

As I expected, your arguments are entirely underwhelming. So much so, I can't be bothered making any further comment expect to say that they are so :mad: superficial they would be sneered out of court by the cerebral members of the Juvenile Debating Club at my old College. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Now, you have a noice day listening to Jones, Hadley, Price and the other screaming but even-handed shock jocks on commercial radio. :ok:

bosnich71 30th Jan 2014 05:10

500 .... I also used to listen to John Faine when travelling to work but then one day I realised that I had driven through two sets of traffic lights, whilst shouting at the radio, and couldn't remember what colour they'd been . http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...cons/icon7.gif

500N 30th Jan 2014 05:10

The Abbott government is poised to launch an "efficiency study" into the ABC
 
The ABC is gooooonnnneeee !

A tactically and strategically well planned operation by Tony Abbott
with the ABC playing the part beautifully ! Who needs a judge and
jury when they hang themselves :ok:


"The Abbott government is poised to launch an "efficiency study" into the ABC a move that will exacerbate the already extraordinary pressure on the national broadcaster.
Read more: Abbott government to launch 'efficiency study' into ABC, SBS


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:59.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.