Government owned media - ABC & SBS


Government owned media - ABC & SBS

Author
Message
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
TheFactOfTheMatter wrote:
AzzaMarch wrote:

I think there is a certain TYPE of right winger, particularly in the USA to whom you could attribute the claims made by Murdoch Rags - 9/11 truther, Obama 'birther', guns rights extremist etc.

The thing I really have a problem with is identity politics - but this is much more of an American phenomenon than an Australian one at this stage.

Why does (for example) fiscal conservatism mean you have to be against women's choice when it comes to abortion?


Women's choice when it comes to abortion? What about the kid's choice?
Fiscal is in relation to finance, it has nothing to do with a moral stance.

Australia is very much embroiled in identity politics. You only have to look at this forum as evidence.


I think you missed my point completely.

Fiscal conservatism has nothing to do with abortion. But to be regarded as a conservative in the USA you need to say that you are a fiscal conservative and 'pro-life', hence Donald Trump's backflip on abortion.
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
AzzaMarch wrote:

The problem is when you ascribe right/left wingers with the above descriptions you are actually arguing against a strawman that only exists on a very small level. The vast majority of people live between those extremes.


Read the comments on any FB page belonging to the Greens.

So much moral high ground, so little economics :lol:


Hmmm I think you could say the same thing about the comments on any political party's FB page!
CG2430
CG2430
Hardcore Fan
Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)Hardcore Fan (229 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 221, Visits: 0
AzzaMarch wrote:
The other issue is to ask what even qualifies as right wing or left wing. This differs across different countries, and different times.
...


Very important point.

'Left wing' in the USA is probably considered 'centrist' in Australia, and 'centrist' considered 'right wing'.

Take Medicare, for example. Tony Abbott has often trotted out the 'best friend' line - would a Republican ever dare to say that he/she is a proponent of a heavily socialised health system, let alone actually support it?

What is 'right wing' in Australia? What is the threshold?

Is David Leyonhjelm, for example, 'right wing'? Supports guns, huge proponent of free market economics, but has also promoted the traditionally 'left wing' cause of same-sex marriage, again because he believes in (extremely) small government.

Maybe that makes him a 'libertarian', but I don't think that's universally defined either.

Back to the main topic at hand, I can't see any purpose for SBS these days. Aside from the impression I get that it's strayed from its main purpose and become just another outlet for hipsters, it's 2016, and news and entertainment from non-English speaking countries can be found relatively easily (plus their football coverage is a shadow of what it once was anyway). There's no need for taxpayers to fund this.

I'm willing to cut the ABC a bit more slack, but on balance I'd still say get rid of it. It costs a stupid amount of money to run and the state shouldn't be in the business of television anyway. I might even suggest just giving it to the employees and see how they go trying to fund it themselves (like every other media organisation)...
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K, Visits: 0
CG2430 wrote:
the state shouldn't be in the business of television anyway.

Until our laws change so that false, misleading & unsubstantiated reporting is punished monetarily & criminally, I believe if anything state owned media should increase, not decrease.
This law change won't happen because Murdoch's right wing empire would be bankrupted.
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K, Visits: 0
quickflick wrote:
You're not aware of such research? Oh do forgive me. To be fair to you, you never did claim the existence of such research.

So you misrepresented reality

quickflick wrote:
Hermann Goering had an IQ that was off the charts.

A sample size of one.
This suggests you don't understand peer review &/or statistical data analysis

quickflick
quickflick
World Class
World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:
quickflick wrote:
You're not aware of such research? Oh do forgive me. To be fair to you, you never did claim the existence of such research.

So you misrepresented reality

quickflick wrote:
Hermann Goering had an IQ that was off the charts.

A sample size of one.
This suggests you don't understand peer review &/or statistical data analysis


I have misrepresented reality far less than you do on a daily basis, my friend.

Oh I daresay if we look hard enough we'll find any number of serial killers, egotistical politicians, CEOs, Wall Street traders, so on and so forth with very high IQs. I do understand peer-review and statistical data, I just prefer to spend my time watching sport or researching stuff that I'm studying formally or which will be beneficial to me (languages, history, philosophy, the odd medical journal, etc). Regardless of anything I say, your assertion will remain wrong and hurtful to many people.

Anyway, I believe it was you who asserted that there is likely a correlation between those who have a high IQ and greater levels of empathy. The burden of proof is on you to prove that is the case. Not me. I don't need to prove a negative.

Schoolboy philosophy, my friend.
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
CG2430 wrote:
AzzaMarch wrote:
The other issue is to ask what even qualifies as right wing or left wing. This differs across different countries, and different times.
...


Very important point.

'Left wing' in the USA is probably considered 'centrist' in Australia, and 'centrist' considered 'right wing'.

Take Medicare, for example. Tony Abbott has often trotted out the 'best friend' line - would a Republican ever dare to say that he/she is a proponent of a heavily socialised health system, let alone actually support it?

What is 'right wing' in Australia? What is the threshold?

Is David Leyonhjelm, for example, 'right wing'? Supports guns, huge proponent of free market economics, but has also promoted the traditionally 'left wing' cause of same-sex marriage, again because he believes in (extremely) small government.

Maybe that makes him a 'libertarian', but I don't think that's universally defined either.

Back to the main topic at hand, I can't see any purpose for SBS these days. Aside from the impression I get that it's strayed from its main purpose and become just another outlet for hipsters, it's 2016, and news and entertainment from non-English speaking countries can be found relatively easily (plus their football coverage is a shadow of what it once was anyway). There's no need for taxpayers to fund this.

I'm willing to cut the ABC a bit more slack, but on balance I'd still say get rid of it. It costs a stupid amount of money to run and the state shouldn't be in the business of television anyway. I might even suggest just giving it to the employees and see how they go trying to fund it themselves (like every other media organisation)...


Couple of points in response:

I agree SBS has strayed from its mandate, but that is because of cuts in govt funding. They have to rely more and more on ad revenue, so are under pressure to provide more commercial content.

I think SBS is vitally important in providing and alternative perspective, and a more international outlook on news and culture.

As an example - compare "The Family Law" with that "Here Come the Habibs" on Channel 9.

As far as ABC goes, I do quibble with your point that the "state shouldn't be in the business of television anyway". They aren't really - ABC is independent. They are govt funded, but they are not an arm of the govt.

Again, I think they are crucial, mainly because of how concentrated our media ownership is. This will be even more the case when the media laws get relaxed and the TV stations tie-up with Fairfax and NewsCorp.

The only country with more concentrated media ownership than Australia was Italy under Berlusconi.
sokorny
sokorny
Pro
Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K, Visits: 0
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/mark-scott-delivers-national-press-club-address/7195888

Probably the best result that could be achieved between the two. I'd say SBS role as providing news sources from other nations has diminished lately, due to the internet and numerous channels available on cable/streaming services.

Documentary shows are largely confined to ABC and SBS .... so there is definitely a need for them. Even shows such as Q&A are very important to maintain in Australia (commercial channels have tried unsuccessfully to host similar shows) too.

I'd say with the ability to have multiple channels that a merged ABC/SBS would economically make the most sense, and take the best aspects from each.

SBS also have for years provided a great source of foreign films and TV series, that no commercial channel would touch with a ten foot pole. How would we know who Gamera or Inspector Rex was if it wasn't for SBS!
GDeathe
GDeathe
Pro
Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)Pro (2.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K, Visits: 0
sokorny wrote:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/mark-scott-delivers-national-press-club-address/7195888

Probably the best result that could be achieved between the two. I'd say SBS role as providing news sources from other nations has diminished lately, due to the internet and numerous channels available on cable/streaming services.

Documentary shows are largely confined to ABC and SBS .... so there is definitely a need for them. Even shows such as Q&A are very important to maintain in Australia (commercial channels have tried unsuccessfully to host similar shows) too.

I'd say with the ability to have multiple channels that a merged ABC/SBS would economically make the most sense, and take the best aspects from each.

SBS also have for years provided a great source of foreign films and TV series, that no commercial channel would touch with a ten foot pole. How would we know who Gamera or Inspector Rex was if it wasn't for SBS!


Channel 31/44, does it all without fully being on the public purse like SBS
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K, Visits: 0
SBS now has 1x EPL game per week, plus a chunk of WC games
sokorny
sokorny
Pro
Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)Pro (3.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K, Visits: 0
GDeathe wrote:
sokorny wrote:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/mark-scott-delivers-national-press-club-address/7195888

Probably the best result that could be achieved between the two. I'd say SBS role as providing news sources from other nations has diminished lately, due to the internet and numerous channels available on cable/streaming services.

Documentary shows are largely confined to ABC and SBS .... so there is definitely a need for them. Even shows such as Q&A are very important to maintain in Australia (commercial channels have tried unsuccessfully to host similar shows) too.

I'd say with the ability to have multiple channels that a merged ABC/SBS would economically make the most sense, and take the best aspects from each.

SBS also have for years provided a great source of foreign films and TV series, that no commercial channel would touch with a ten foot pole. How would we know who Gamera or Inspector Rex was if it wasn't for SBS!


Channel 31/44, does it all without fully being on the public purse like SBS


I would say their products are still far inferior to those produced and telecasted by either ABC or SBS. But yes there are alternatives (which are community funded largely).

The concern could be that Australian's will miss out of shows that aren't "commercially" viable (how long before a community funded project needs to think commercially to make ends meet?). How many more cooking shows do we need? SBS originally brought us Iron Chef look before the other shows, SBS produced and broadcasted a documentary about West Aussie regional men finding a wife (before 9 commercialised it to "Farmer Wants a Wife") etc. The point is that by being government funded these channels do not necessarily need to replicate shows, but can show original shows (even in foreign languages), or explore social issues without having to turning it into a game. The bottom dollar of SBS/ABC shows are not necessarily ratings (or advertising dollars) but providing a service to the community.

An example, the WAFL last year was picked up by Channel 7, after ABC budget cuts meant they couldn't afford to telecast games. One of the WAFL teams was sponsored by 9, so that team was not shown on Channel 7's telecasts. ABC had no such qualms the season before.
GO


Select a Forum....























Inside Sport


Search