Heritier Lumumba

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

1 minute ago, grazman said:

If I was being cynical, I'd say Eddie is trying to further diminish HL and his claims in the eyes of the Collingwood faithful even more than the club has already (I doubt that many of the Magpie supporters would pick up on the not so subtle distinction that when you ask for fairness and respect that it isn't the same as being given a soggy salad sandwich and told to shut up).  If I wasn't being cynical, I'd say Ed has the EQ of a turnip! 

He's more beetroot man,  'gm'.

[grazman 7,451]

4 minutes ago, MyFavouriteMartian said:

He's more beetroot man,  'gm'.

fixed 

[dieter 3,325]

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

i definitely struggle to understand those who can't see systemic bias in the abc. i can only conclude it is because those people just enjoy being preached to by the choir 

If you' struggle to understand those ...Um, er, am I allowed to ask what level did you reach at school, DC? Methinks you struggle with a lot of basic things, but that's just my opinion. 

Also, has it ever occurred to you that the basic job of a journalist is to call out lies and bulldust. The so-called Coalition has been running this country - spell ruining - since 2013. If you believe in democracy, which I assume you do, you would expect journalists to not just be a mouthpiece for government policies, you might well consider it is their job to call out the rorts and scandals that governments try to get away with. Murdoch's puppets don't and won't: that so called bastion of democracy simply hires right wing lunatics to espouse even more crap that any conservative government will ever try to get away with. BUT, when ABC journalists have the guts to call bulldust and lies for what it is, self righteous men of the so-called centre call them  left wing biased as bad as  commies. Give me a break, baby Daisy, give me a friggin break.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

1 hour ago, ding said:

The one part you failed to highlight was that the charter says they have to be balanced.

Well now, I could have sworn I quoted that part.

1 hour ago, ding said:

They are not, and only extremists think so.

No, we certainly don't want extreme points of view, do we?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

9 hours ago, ding said:

There are some, but the answer is totally irrelevant.

The ABC has a charter to be balanced while the others dont and can please themselves.

Their ABC has gone so far left it is beyond redemption.

Axe it now and save the $1B AUD

Absolute rubbish. When the LNP has gone so far to the right those in the centre are seen as far left.

What sort of examples are you talking about to show the "far left" agenda of the ABC?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

9 hours ago, ding said:

Aged Care Nurse and Union Rep.

Nice assumption fail.

#DefundtheABC

So we get rid of the ABC. And then the public discourse in Australia is left to Murdoch, Stokes and.....

Yeah I can't see that ending badly.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

9 hours ago, ding said:

Sky News Chanel for a start. You know, the Channel that was selected to be our overseas braodcaster before Conroy stepped in and gave it to #theirABC in perpetuity. 

AP are also usually even handed.

 

The worst in Oz are ABC, and The Guardian and the HUN on the other side. At least the Australian gives a platform to Left leaning contributors.

Most biased in the US are CNN, MSDNC, NYT, WAPO, Fox and Breitbart

As before though, the answer is irrellevant. None of these outlets OTHER than the ABC has a public funding charter to provide balance. It doest, and has not for a very long time.

Now yours champ.

Wait you think Sky News is is impartial? I assume you're being deliberately provocative, no sane person would make that statement seriously

[Northern Summer 292]

On 6/11/2020 at 8:24 PM, Dr. Gonzo said:

Generally, yes.

?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

9 hours ago, daisycutter said:

why is that relevant ds?

he claims the abc is decidedly and systemically biased, which i agree with. you seem to disagree

the argument is not whether other media are biased or to what extent. The abc is unique being government (tax-payer) funded

If you think the ABC is decidedly and systematically biased you need to provide examples. You can't expect to just state it and think it is taken as fact.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Dr. Gonzo

[daisycutter 29,738]

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

He is entitled to post an opinion/perception, it's only where opinion is stated as fact, which happens quite often on this board, that a person should be challenged as wrong

It also depends on your definition of class system

White racists/supremacists believe they are a class above, particularly above anybody with a brown skin, perhaps that it was the poster was alluding to

Eddie McGuire is a racist, has the infamous runs on the board

 

fyi he edited and changed his post to remove superfluous adjective

nice try saty

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

7 hours ago, daisycutter said:

i don't know much about skynews and never watch it

.....but a true impartial media will employ people from both sides of politics including those a bit more than just a little either way of centre. i'd rather hear voices of both sides from a particular media outlet than just one side, especially one i am forced to pay for

ymfyd if it helps you

Giving airtime to any fruit loop with an agenda (especially those pushing agendas of far right lobby groups like the IPA) isn't being impartial. Opinions, agendas and ideologies don't automatically have a right to be taken seriously otherwise you end up with airtime being given to those neo-nazi [censored] like Blair Cottrell

[daisycutter 29,738]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Giving airtime to any fruit loop with an agenda (especially those pushing agendas of far right lobby groups like the IPA) isn't being impartial. Opinions, agendas and ideologies don't automatically have a right to be taken seriously otherwise you end up with airtime being given to those neo-nazi [censored] like Blair Cottrell

you just keep repeating yourself. the abc are not balanced. they glorify extreme left commentators but give the right little opportunity. you obviously are quite alright with that, but i would like the abc to  be more reporters, allow both sides to put their view forward in a balanced way and not so obviously take sides. they treat the public as ignorant and not capable of sifting the info and making up their own mind. of course those of similar ideology are their cheerleaders and love it. i know you probably believe i'm some right wing neocon, but i'm really not. some of my views are very much left, some would be considered right and many simply in the middle. i have no allegiance to any party nor any particular ideology. i used to watch a lot of abc, but not lately because of the above. they still do make some good television, but i won't start watching again until they show some reasonable balance.   

[Dr. Gonzo 24,298]

9 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

you just keep repeating yourself. the abc are not balanced. they glorify extreme left commentators but give the right little opportunity. you obviously are quite alright with that, but i would like the abc to  be more reporters, allow both sides to put their view forward in a balanced way and not so obviously take sides. they treat the public as ignorant and not capable of sifting the info and making up their own mind. of course those of similar ideology are their cheerleaders and love it. i know you probably believe i'm some right wing neocon, but i'm really not. some of my views are very much left, some would be considered right and many simply in the middle. i have no allegiance to any party nor any particular ideology. i used to watch a lot of abc, but not lately because of the above. they still do make some good television, but i won't start watching again until they show some reasonable balance.   

You say I keep repeating myself, well that's because I'm asking for some examples or studies to prove your assertions of bias and they aren't forthcoming.

You say the right has little opportunity, anytime I've watched the ABC News or current affairs programs they always have guests on from a broad spectrum. LNP members of parliament and Ministers are often interviewed or form part of panels. ALP guests are often grilled as much as their LNP counterparts. The bias you claim isn't my experience of the ABC; if this bias is so fundamentally evident as you claim it should be easy enough to point out some examples or studies showing this.

I distrust agendas more than anything and when I look at the agenda being pushed to destroy the ABC it is clear this is being pushed by special interest groups such as the IPA who have a vested interest in shutting down critical journalism of their far-right policies to sell off public assets, subsidise multi-billion dollar corporations, destroy local industries, enact neo-liberal laissez faire ideologies to put more cash in the pockets of their far-right lobbyists etc etc I see that as far more dangerous to a healthy democracy than any perceived bias of the ABC, which has not been demonstrated to date.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Dr. Gonzo

[daisycutter 29,738]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

You say I keep repeating myself, well that's because I'm asking for some examples or studies to prove your assertions of bias and they aren't forthcoming.

You say the right has little opportunity, anytime I've watched the ABC News or current affairs programs they always have guests on from a broad spectrum. LNP members of parliament and Ministers are often interviewed or form part of panels. ALP guests are often grilled as much as their LNP counterparts. The bias you claim isn't my experience of the ABC; if this bias is so fundamentally evident as you claim it should be easy enough to point out some examples or studies showing this.

I distrust agendas more than anything and when I look at the agenda being pushed to destroy the ABC it is clear this is being pushed by special interest groups such as the IPA who have a vested interest in shutting down critical journalism of their far-right policies to sell off public assets, subsidise multi-billion dollar corporations, destroy local industries, enact neo-liberal laissez faire ideologies to put more cash in the pockets of their far-right lobbyists etc etc I see that as far more dangerous to a healthy democracy than any perceived bias of the ABC, which has not been demonstrated to date.

dg, it's my opinion

i'm not going to get into a point for point drawn out discussion. it's not important to me whether i could ever convince you of my pov

i would never have brought up my thoughts on the abc if some clown hadn't initially made a statement about how balanced he thought they were

we are way off topic. this is supposed to be a thread about hl and his desire to get acknowledgement from the filth for racist treatment towards him

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

42 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

fyi he edited and changed his post to remove superfluous adjective

nice try saty

Only because he was 'stomped'

I don't have to try on this board, to quote Donald 'it's easy'

As for your assertion about the ABC, I now have  left leaning acquaintances saying since Ita took over, they favour the right now

[Satyriconhome 10,879]

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

dg, it's my opinion

i'm not going to get into a point for point drawn out discussion. it's not important to me whether i could ever convince you of my pov

i would never have brought up my thoughts on the abc if some clown hadn't initially made a statement about how balanced he thought they were

we are way off topic. this is supposed to be a thread about hl and his desire to get acknowledgement from the filth for racist treatment towards him

Why a clown? Surely somebody of a differing opinion?

Oh that's right only your opinion is correct

[ding 5,126]

54 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

If you think the ABC is decidedly and systematically biased you need to provide examples. You can't expect to just state it and think it is taken as fact.

 

 

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Wait you think Sky News is is impartial? I assume you're being deliberately provocative, no sane person would make that statement seriously

Hypocrite thay name is Dr. Gonzo

 

Sky NEWS is impartial and should have been our international broadcaster. Im talking JUST  the news service, not the opinion shows.

Bolt et al (who are as partisan as the ABC) were never going to be a part of the Sky international channel.

 

 

[daisycutter 29,738]

7 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Only because he was 'stomped'

 

not true. he sent me a pm...........but now you are also a mindreader

[Mel Bourne 4,534]

4 hours ago, ding said:

If you dont like losing arguments, best you not engage in future

If you regard chickening out of a question with childish, cliched insults “winning”, then yeah I guess I “lost”. Anyway, you’re about to become the first person I’ve ever put on ignore here, and ignorance will indeed be bliss. 

[Sigil 1,001]

Ahahahahaha, the ABC is extreme "left", pull the other one.

The "left" if you want to narrow down things into a tribal wonkfest have been complaining about the ABC for years.

But I guess if you see things like Alex Jones, Stormfront* and Sky News as the center.... not much can be done, you have already jumped down the rabbit hole and there isn't a ladder to get out of that shizen show.

Extreme left?!?!?

What a joke.

 

*Yeah that was done on purpose.

[P-man 13,366]

5 hours ago, ding said:

The one part you failed to highlight was that the charter says they have to be balanced.

They are not, and only extremists think so.

I guess I’m an extremist. Oh well.

You do realise that ABC’s Insiders is now hosted by David Speers. The same David Speers who was a regular on Sky News and spent no less than 20 years with News Corp. You can see Ita’s fingerprints all over his appointment.

The show now regularly features the likes of Greg Sheridan and Annika Smethurst. Both Murdoch head nodders.

Afternoons on ABC News is hosted by Patricia Karvelas, another ex Murdoch employee.

They have done several studies on bias at the ABC to try and appease the likes of Bolt, and evidently yourself, who truly seem to believe it is a greeny propaganda machine. Measuring what can be measured, like equal coverage during elections. Every time the studies show no evidence of bias. They also repeatedly show the ABC to be the public’s most trusted source of news compared to other outlets by a considerable margin.

But it will never be enough, will it? Nothing will convince you. What WOULD convince you? More appearances from people who believe climate change is all a storm in a teacup perhaps. Shut up lefties and take your “science” with you.

Opinions like yours aren’t just cliched. They are oh so bloody tiresome to listen to.

Still love your work though, ding. Nothing personal.

[ding 5,126]

31 minutes ago, P-man said:

I guess I’m an extremist. Oh well.

You do realise that ABC’s Insiders is now hosted by David Speers. The same David Speers who was a regular on Sky News and spent no less than 20 years with News Corp. You can see Ita’s fingerprints all over his appointment.

The show now regularly features the likes of Greg Sheridan and Annika Smethurst. Both Murdoch head nodders.

Afternoons on ABC News is hosted by Patricia Karvelas, another ex Murdoch employee.

They have done several studies on bias at the ABC to try and appease the likes of Bolt, and evidently yourself, who truly seem to believe it is a greeny propaganda machine. Measuring what can be measured, like equal coverage during elections. Every time the studies show no evidence of bias. They also repeatedly show the ABC to be the public’s most trusted source of news compared to other outlets by a considerable margin.

But it will never be enough, will it? Nothing will convince you. What WOULD convince you? More appearances from people who believe climate change is all a storm in a teacup perhaps. Shut up lefties and take your “science” with you.

Opinions like yours aren’t just cliched. They are oh so bloody tiresome to listen to.

Still love your work though, ding. Nothing personal.

Nah, all good P-Man. 

The reactions on here have reinforced what i thought. Leftists get all frothy at the mouth when their ABC is disrespected. It is exactly what i expected, and what has occured. (as my posts will have reinforced whatever feelings the Leftist reader wanted it to reinforce)

The simple, undeniable fact that "progressives" get all up in arms about the ABC being disrespected, while "conservatives" believe it is horribly, irredeemably biased proves my point. I always get a chuckle out of claims like "the right have moved so far to the extremes etc etc"..... its an obvious Strawman, but gets used all the time.

The exact same thing in reverse happens when you discuss practically any other network. Witness the reactions to the mere mention of Sky News. Your own comments pointing to former Murdoch employees as obviously from one side of politics is another example. you certainly didnt use the link to show that Murdoch employees are unbiased did you? How would it look if i did the same with any number of former ABC propagandists presenters... kinda feels the same doesnt it? We all know who is biased in their reporting, and the ABC is right at the very top of that list. The people they got across from Murdoch were for the very reason i stated... The ABC was screaming out for some balance. That you think they dont belong at the ABC again reinforces my point. The Left cant stand having to give airtime to anyone right of ANTIFA. Remember when Amanda Vanstone (iirc) had her own show on ABC? It was ironically called "Counterpoint"... obviously because a Conservative viewpoint was counter to the prevailing view of Their ABC. It has been going on for years and years.

There is not a single news network in the Western world who can reasonably claim to be genuinely down the middle. ALL OF THEM favor one side of politics over the other.

People will naturally gravitate to whichever news source gives them a viewpoint that matches theirs. It is human nature.

I have 3 tabs saved which automatically open in my browser whenever i open Chrome.

Hun, Oz and The Age.

The truth will usually be somewhere in the middle. Dont get me started on The Guardian.... its absolute trash.

*i would still take Sky news over Their ABC News any day of the week. 

Edited June 12, 2020 by ding

[P-man 13,366]

33 minutes ago, ding said:

Nah, all good P-Man. 

The reactions on here have reinforced what i thought. Leftists get all frothy at the mouth when their ABC is disrespected. It is exactly what i expected, and what has occured. (as my posts will have reinforced whatever feelings the Leftist reader wanted it to reinforce)

The simple, undeniable fact that "progressives" get all up in arms about the ABC being disrespected, while "conservatives" believe it is horribly, irredeemably biased proves my point. I always get a chuckle out of claims like "the right have moved so far to the extremes etc etc"..... its an obvious Strawman, but gets used all the time.

The exact same thing in reverse happens when you discuss practically any other network. Witness the reactions to the mere mention of Sky News. Your own comments pointing to former Murdoch employees as obviously from one side of politics is another example. you certainly didnt use the link to show that Murdoch employees are unbiased did you? How would it look if i did the same with any number of former ABC propagandists presenters... kinda feels the same doesnt it? We all know who is biased in their reporting, and the ABC is right at the very top of that list. The people they got across from Murdoch were for the very reason i stated... The ABC was screaming out for some balance. That you think they dont belong at the ABC again reinforces my point. The Left cant stand having to give airtime to anyone right of ANTIFA. Remember when Amanda Vanstone (iirc) had her own show on ABC? It was ironically called "Counterpoint"... obviously because a Conservative viewpoint was counter to the prevailing view of Their ABC. It has been going on for years and years.

There is not a single news network in the Western world who can reasonably claim to be genuinely down the middle. ALL OF THEM favor one side of politics over the other.

People will naturally gravitate to whichever news source gives them a viewpoint that matches theirs. It is human nature.

I have 3 tabs saved which automatically open in my browser whenever i open Chrome.

Hun, Oz and The Age.

The truth will usually be somewhere in the middle. Dont get me started on The Guardian.... its absolute trash.

*i would still take Sky news over Their ABC News any day of the week. 

I‘m not a fan of most Murdoch mouthpieces, it’s true. I don’t even feel the need to apologise for that. So I won’t. But yes, their appointment is evidence of trying to appease the right constantly bleating about bias.

Your response acknowledges that they have attempted to address what you saw as “screaming out for balance”. So comparatively even you must acknowledge that they have made headway. Yet you still think they are a propaganda machine? Based on what? As I’ve said, the claims of bias are demonstrably wrong. I mean have you listened Greg Sheridan talk politics? He once described Donald Trump as a “wise and empathetic leader”. He’s given various platforms on the ABC. Relatively unopposed.

My theory on this is pretty simple. Conservatives HATE being criticised when they are in government. It’s part of that whole born to govern mentality and rather ironic for supposed defenders of “free speech”. So when the ABC dares to hold the government to account, a foreign concept to a regular Sky News viewers, the right screams “BIAS!”. If anything, the ABC doesn’t go anywhere far enough in its critique because it is now scared ****less of accusation one million about being a bunch of treehuggers. 

I will agree with you on one point. We do naturally gravitate to news sources that align with our world view. Or at the very least, we will steer away from news sources that make us want to put a boot through the tv. For me when I went factual reporting, I’ll go to the ABC every time be it tv or digital. And frankly anyone who wants to defund it because they were too tough on poor old George Pell can GAGF.

Edited June 12, 2020 by P-man

[ProperDee 1,698]

Wow! I just read every post in this thread. That’s 30 minutes of my life I will never get back.

its game day for the Demons. I couldn’t give a toss about Heritier, politics, protest marches or COVID-19.  My immediate concerns are which pizza will I order for half time, making sure my beers are extra icy by first bounce and enjoying the Dees demolishing Carlton.

The world and its many issues can damn well wait.

[chookrat 4,268]

I just read the last page and not one mention of the Prince, what's up with that?