Noticed how Leigh sales article has the press backing her up but they said nothing when Julia Gillard copped vile articles and when they gleefully mocked and bullied yasemin . Even some on here did the same

to touch on this and tsf/mcjules/carlito comments.....

IMO, your/we're seeing what is society's behaviour today for everyone has a forum to speak.
What do you think has caused such inbalance ?

There's that word again. If your political views do no align with my woke ones, you are not a decent human being.  More banging of the Democrats 2020 campaign drum

This is what decent government in a Leftist socialist woke political state looks like:

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/the-chosen-few-how-victoria-is-really-governed-20210803-p58fk4.html

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/flagrantly-reckless-victoria-signed-china-infrastructure-deal-without-consulting-dfat-20200526-p54wfn.html

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/the-health-of-our-democratic-institutions-is-important-too-mr-andrews-20210830-p58n92.html

The Left doesn't want democracy.  They don't want individual freedoms and rights. They don't want  a fair go for all.  They don't give a rats about climate change Wake up to what being Left really means.  Its not what you think.  You are being lied to.

Great lets silence everyone with a left-leaning view. I'll decide what and who that is.  Agreed?

An "imbalance" is not caused by allowing people a platform to speak.  That happens when you silence alternate speech, and the the opposite happens when you have diverse speech.

What we have is polarization. 

The Left started it with their divisive polices under-pinned by race and identity.

Climate change is a leftist love topic by the same people who travel by plane, often frequently,  consume rabidly, fill their homes with multiple polluting vehicles and other junk,

The hypocrisy of the left evidenced by the difference between they say and what they do makes questionable the mental faculties of their supporters.

As a corollary could you please explain if it's possible to care about climate change without being labelled 'left'.

Asking for a friend. 

Also, and don't get me wrong, I do like you posting up articles of corruption and poor governance (neatly sidestepping the Porter thing in the process but whatever) but I do find it amazing that you link what you would call 'left-leaning' media to illustrate your point.

I thought they're all liars leading the 'sheeple' by the nose.

I know what you're doing, I get it Enzo. You're posting those so no one can say 'ah Foxnews, they're a joke anyway'. But it's either good reporting or it's not. If you're linking them to illustrate your point and they're good enough journalists to illustrate your point then, by extension, they're good journalists full stop.

Either stop linking articles from the 'MSM' that you rail against or agree that, actually, they're pumping out some pretty good stuff.


(And say the ABC is value for money.)

A bridge too far that last one?

The media has a lot to answer for. The drive for clicks means a race to the bottom. That's one theory.

Creating a left/right divide. People then claiming to speak for/represent one side or know what the other side represents. 

I think the public can't be bothered with all the ugliness and just tune out altogether. And when issue of accountability arise, no one cares because the public paint all pollies with the same brush.

Which says a lot about how the media have gone to full click bait.  We used to have a proper media where debate was encouraged.  Now we only have the whole oh you're right/left arguments . There's no discussion but insults.  Our media landscape has shrunk when even Fairfax who used to be centre left/left have gone murdoch and sensationalist. Or how the abc which was very down the middle have gone pro liberal 

Not talking about you. You come across as a thoroughly decent human being able to look at anything subjectively. 

The French submarine deal has been ditched and we're going with nuclear-powered American and British tech, seems to be motivated by Biden with China in mind. Hopefully will help lead to Australia finally waking up to nuclear power.

Firstly I've already said I deliberately link to the left-leaning media when arguing my case to left leaning people, as you correctly point out.

Secondly  Fox News IS also part of the Mainstream Media.  Fox News does good reporting.  for example they were the only ones that ran with the Covid Lab Leak Theory and detailed all of the conflict of interests in the WHO and the scientists who were all too quick to dismiss it. Fox also does biased reporting.

In that regard they are no better or worse than CNN. for example. The difference is when Fox tell lies, they are easily identified.  The left-wing media OTOH is far more sophisticated in hiding their bias.  It uses often subtle use of language and turn of phrase that appear innocuous or even accidental but are anything but.  In fact its more insidious and dangerous than what fox does because its harder to pin down and dismiss.   But its there.

That is not  a good thing for democracy.

So how do YOU decide if its "good" reporting? 

If you're like every other Leftist I know, you solely look at *who* is writing the report.  NOT the substance of it. So therefore I have to provide links form your preferred sources.  I could first show you the same thing on Fox, but that would be an easy way out for you.  So I don't.

Me, I like to learn both sides of the argument.

Says every 'centrist' ever.

You're actually missing the point.

You may not even know this, you may even be doing it subconsciously, but that word was a cornerstone of the Biden campaign in 2020.

"Joe Biden is a decent man "-  B Obama, and many,  other Democrats

"This [policy of ours] is the decent thing to do".

Break it down. 

What are they saying?

Well, basically they are claiming the moral high ground.  Joe Biden is morally superior.  If you don't vote for Joe, you're not decent.  If you don't agree with our policies, you're not decent.

Its right out of the left-wing political playback : a passive-agressive attack on people who don't agree.

Even Dan Andrews started using it soon after.

everyone has there own version of decent amd subjective to the person.  

Hahahaha. As if anyone from the GOP or the Coalition in Australia hasn't ever used 'decent' (or pick any other synonym) before to either spruik a policy or deride the other party. You are a clown.

What about Scomo's constant use of the 'I reject the premise of your question' or 'I'm not going to dignify that with an answer' as a copout from scrutiny. (See also Brad Hazzard and Peter Dutton.) Fucking load of bollocks and you know it. Except, as a 'centrist' (LoL) you won't call it out.

Or the classic ‘insert someone who is not even being talked about and act like it’s an afront to an innocent group as to not answer the question’

example 

reporter: scomo, why is the roll out so slow?

Scomo: I’m not going to sit up here and have you trash the good name of our frontline nurses. 

Bandt with the alarmist "floating Chernobyl" hyperbole. No wonder nobody takes the Greens seriously.

yet we keep having a % of numbskulls/and sheeple that vote for them and what a waste of a vote.
Same goes for the many smaller parties today, useless donkey votes.

Agreed guys on the media, absolutley shocking today.
Quality gone down the tubes like our pollies.
Lack of substance from all.
Accountabiltly only comes if a fall guy/lady needs to fall to avoid or obstruck what really lies beneath.
Question time used to be in parliament, nowadays with SM its seen far more widely, yes we switch off but we remember when it comes to vote, well the portion that do vote with a purpose.

Yep . What an idiotic response from him.  Nuclear have come a long way from the days of Chernobyl.  Eg fukishma 

Adam bandt and a lot of the greens are such phonies. 

I always vote for the Greens in the senate despite the few loopy ones. 

I believe the fact that the incumbent government can't jam through whatever it wants in a friendly senate easily outweighs the few weird statements the Greens put out occasionally. Generally I think they're value for money.

And as a bonus it drives my father-in-law nuts. (He believes the senate should be a rubber stamp.)

My problem is they are diluting votes from people who think they’re a good option and don’t really understand their policies. Some of their policies are fine but there is little substance behind populist leftist issues. 

If the Democrats (Don Schipp's party) were still around I'd vote for them but I can't and voting for the Secular or Science party is not helping anyone get elected so I vote Greens.

To be honest even when Labour has been in power I've voted for the Greens. And as much as I hate to admit it having Lambie and say Hinch (when he was there) is not as bad as it could be. Of course then you get nutters in there with 16 votes like every second Qld senator sometimes (Malcolm Roberts) but that's the stupid voting system we have. (They really need to tweak that.).

Anyway it comes down to my belief the Senate should be a house of review not a rubber stamp.

Unfortunately sometimes it's a circus.

Are they diluting votes though? If your first choice doesn't garner enough votes doesn't that go to your next candidate?

Sound like I'm contradicting myself here but I often put the Secular Party down as #1, then say Euthanasia Party #2 or Science Party or whatever before I vote Greens because the first 2 will go by the wayside and my vote will go where I wanted it anyway. (I think that these little blokes covering niche issues are worth backing otherwise how do you ever change anything. And it encourages them to keep fighting the good fight.)

This is going to make me sound very petty (my wife thinks I'm nuts) but I number the senate paper from 1 to 160 or whatever just so I can put Pauline Hanson last. Lol. It's my little up yours to that racist clown.

^^^
Enzo will have a field day with this.

If Victoria they def are. 

The greens controlled council is a shocker - and that;s saying something for councils. 

Agree with your posts above. I am in similar boat. In the last decade I have voted a mix of labor, greens, independents, even the socialists (the local socialist in melbourne is actually quite good). Previously I'd voted liberal and the dems a few times. Liberal is the best party for me personally if I was to vote greedy and purely along financial lines but in the current form it is in I would never do that.

and the ALP alliance with Unions replacing private school toffs.
Yes alot of these minor parties contribute either side in maintaining their numbers/power, the big 2.
IMO these small ones contribute nothing much - Muz brought up Hansons/Hinch what a joke/Lambie for eg, well they are all a joke, these are donkey votes period and what does it do. F all.
Another joke of joke is Latham with Hanson.

Your right Muz, Chips Demos were are worthy party - they were a viable balance.......
Kernot started the rot losing 5/7% of their votes and worse followed with Stott Despoja.......

They don't really dilute votes but they do act like another opposition party for Labor. News Limited papers and the right of politics do far more damage but the attacks from the Greens mean they're tarnished from both sides.

I personally vote for them in the senate as they can afford to be more principled on progressive issues. Labor goes to water far too often worrying about losing centre right voters.

I will never vote for the socialists after what they did in maryibonong . Ie our academy

The ashes have just gone nuclear

I used to vote Greens because I respect Bob Brown as leader who, despite his faults, is a genuine environmental conservationist. That is what the greens should be about. 

Now ithey're just run by the dickheads that hand out 'Socialist Alliance' newspapers out the front of the Fischer Library at Sydney uni.