Oakes and anyone

In today’s National Times, Laurie Oakes begins his argument with a lament suggesting that he wants to be optimistic about the future of journalism, but is not as optimistic as he would like to be. A reasonable statement? Probably. But then neither are the public approaching anything resembling optimism, given the standard of journalism which presently prevails.

Oakes sets the scene:

For 111 years Australia’s federal politicians and members of the Federal Parliamentary Press Gallery have been matching wits. The politicians have used every trick they know to try to control what the journalists report and how they report it. Gallery members have used every trick they know to get behind the spin and try to dig out things the politicians want to keep hidden.

Photo: The Australian

Photo: The Australian

Ah the noble vocation of journalism. It was so very straightforward in those days according to Oakes; a battle of noble minds (journalists) versus those duplicitous politicians.

One might consider that via today’s current batch of media journalists, that there has been a role reversal:

The politicians journalists have used every trick they know to try to control what the journalists report is reported and how they report it.

Oakes then continues to lay the blame for this “decline” squarely at the foot of the “new” communications technology.

Oakes argues that by “making new communications technology easily and cheaply available to anyone (that) the press gallery’s role seems set to decline, which obviously has implications for the health of our political system”. Oh really?

If one looks at this opinion, the implication is that by making communications technology available to “anyone”, that the aforementioned “anyones” will, as a natural consequence result in a decline in standards. The involvement of these “anyones” has previously been lamented by professional journalists. Is it that only those directly employed by a major newspaper or who gets behind a microphone, or in front of a television camera has a valid opinion? Is an “anyone” aka “a nobody”, aka an ordinary citizen not permitted to voice an opinion; not have an opinion worthy of note?

One need to look no further than Letters to the Editor, and especially those in the Murdoch press, or attempt to have an opinion published on a Murdoch blog for it to become obvious that not just “anyone” and especially those with a contra opinion, is permitted to voice that opinion.

Oakes chooses to use Kevin Rudd as an example of pollie-power:

Rudd, he pointed out, can be sensitive about his privacy – and had the means to retaliate, if he wanted to, by publishing information that would breach the privacy of the journalist.

There’s no suggestion the former prime minister would do that. But the point is he could.

Oakes appears to be suggesting that not only are journalists now being placed in a position where they are subject to scrutiny courtesy of communication technology, but that politicians “might” also use this form of media to retaliate.

With 1.1 million Twitter, 75,000 Facebook friends, and his own YouTube channel, Rudd can get information to a substantial audience without having to rely on journalists or media organisations.

As a conclusion, Oakes provides the reason..

…to avoid the so-called gatekeepers in the press gallery and elsewhere and present their message directly to voters.

And the solution..

Rudd might be the master – the most advanced and media savvy – but any MP can do the same thing, and gradually they’re getting into it.

If there is a solution where is the problem? Oakes’ suggestion is that the “internet era” is set to cause a decline in journalism by “fragmenting the media” and as a consequence has “obvious implications” “for the health of our political system”. The logic of this argument escapes me. Surely if, for example Kevin Rudd has 75,000 Facebook friends that this equates with direct communication, communication which is able to be assessed on merit thereby enhancing the democratic process.

But yes Laurie, the days where journalists were the gatekeepers are numbered.

79 comments on “Oakes and anyone

  1. We all have a right to know the Truth. KRudd having 75000 twit friends does not
    mean we get the Truth any better than now.
    Unfortunately after such a horrible week in Parliament there is no beacon of
    truth displayed by our PM as an example. Quite the contrary.

  2. Heaven forbid that journalists themselves are in any way responsible for this decline in quality of reporting. Oh, wait, it hasn’t been reporting for some time now. Reporting suggests that events are being recounted in a truthful and unbiased manner in order to give the reader a balanced view of what’s going on in, for example, the political arena. Ha! Since 70% of the printed media in this country is owned by Rupert Murdoch, whose dearest wish is a conservative government, any semblance of balance has long been thrown out the second storey window, with a heave and a ho and a great big throw. Personally I prefer to get my news from blogsites such as this, or Independant Australia, or Mamamia.

  3. Min, excellent article/post.
    Laurie Oakes started looking like yesterdays man about 18 months ago, when he seemed to follow the MSM to the radical right, then about 3-4 months ago he seemed to be moving back towards the centre, then the last few times I have seen him, it’s hard to know where he stands, and sadly it appears that even he isn’t sure.

    He must be getting close to retirement, and It does appear that he is struggling to come to terms with the growing irrelevance of the MSM, brought about by the advent of the fifth estate.

    I think he also might be struggling with his own journalistic ethics base, as at time he makes statements that seem fair, balanced and reasonable, and then he reverts back to his previous right wing barracker persona.

    Cheers

  4. Yes Laurie..I can smell the rotting corpse of your corporate protected position from every quarter of the Internet. Maybe an unregulated media and Journalism itself is to blame for liberating and empowering the public to truth. As with everything in industrial evolution, those incapable or unwilling to evolve, like Laurie rot bitterly into irrelevance.

  5. TS, thank you. A thought came to mind that Oakes is struggling with the changes in media..no longer can Oakes and similar pontificate as being the bearers of all valid opinion. How easy is it today to go elsewhere to investigate an alternative opinion. This can only be good for democracy, the ability to investigate and assess for oneself.

  6. I agree with Truth Seeker Min, great article/blog.
    Perhaps Laurie Oakes (who one could mostly rely on for a fair and balanced viewpoint) is struggling within himself as deep down he is beholden to a very narrow ownership of the media in this country. He probably is close to retiring age and doesn’t want to endanger his super.
    You are right TS, he most probably is struggling with his own ethics but because is he of another generation (like me) having to learn to work in another world that keeps changing so quickly could be quite daunting for him.
    He blames the IT and the 5th Estate for the demise of journalism. He is wrong in MHOP. There just needs to be less concentration of ownership in the MSM. The 5th estate is now giving the general public the balance that is needed so that the general public can make up their own minds to the validity of truth in this country.
    I’d like to know just what young students of journalism are taught at Uni. Ethics would have to be one of the most fundamental core elements to start with, followed up with knowing how to communicate without just following the lead of other journalists (herd mentality comes to mind).
    I just hope in the near future that things will change in the media ownership department, but I won’t be holding my breath.
    I just thank heavens that we have blog sites like this and others that I am now able to get both sides of any argument. I take my hat off to you all.

  7. The comment from Oakes which has me somewhat perplexed is,

    the press gallery’s role seems set to decline, which obviously has implications for the health of our political system”.

    Surely the health of our political system is beyond just that of the press gallery. I would have thought that an honest, open and accountable media is of far more importance. Let’s count the number of times where the msm has allowed Tony Abbott to get away with “what ever” in lieu of asking him relevant questions.

  8. Is it the role of the media to be gate keepers. If so that is frightening is a world were a handful of people control that media.

    This in a day when there has never been a wider diversion of methods for the media to spread the world. Up to now, the establishment has manage to keep all under strict control.

    There has always been alternative ways of communications, other than the formal media. The bush telegraph and pamphlets worked well. The message generally managed to get it’s message out. There was time, when every town has it own press and small paper, close to the people that filled the role it was meant to be.

    I do not see the media;s role as gate keepers, if that means keeping information form the people.

    I always seen the role of the media, to be about truth, truth and nothing else.

    If they stick to that role, they will have no problems, nothing but respect. Is that likely to happen, I believe not. Does it matter. In the long run, I believe not. The fifth estate will move into this role, and the fourth estate will lose any relevance.

    Just like the Bolt and Mr.Abbott, I am now watching. This is not what the media should be about. This is what will bring it’s demised on quicker. It is sickening, that it is put forward as a serious current affairs programme. Just as well it is only preaching to the converted. More lies, nothing but lies.

    There will also be serious journalist, they will always find a place to ply their trade, They are now emerging in the fifth estate.

  9. If one needs an example of what the media should not be about, listen to Bolt today. Listen to the rot Abbott is spouting. Talking about foreign policy and the Palestine vote, somehow managing to bring Muslims in the western suburbs of Sydney into the conversation.

    One lot of three word slogans after another

  10. There has always been word of mouth. That is all the fifth estate is, a more efficient word of mouth, from one to another.

    Listening now to Costello. The PM enabled it. Who was the lawyer that enabled Mr. Abbott’s slush fund. Surely they are also liable.

  11. Cu and the media to be about truth, truth and nothing else. And if it is to be opinion that this be clearly stated, unlike as has often been observed on this and other blogs that articles purporting to be factual information contain smatterings of opinion so that the average reader would have difficulty telling one from t’other.

  12. It has to be a joke from Laurie Oakes that Rudd is somehow more influential because he knows how to tweet and he’s on Facebook. Give me a break.

  13. Mr oaks the decline in media is because rich men like your boss dictates we as the public cannot trust Jurno views all the MSM has not repoted fact for years so peple now have a way of geeting facts out there ie: Abbott had a slush fund of his own you knew this you covered it But you hid that fact from us so dont talk to us about how hard bone by MSM is what about the letter from S&G you & MSM have let Abbott claim a clwd over PM http://www.slatergordon.com.au/media/news-media-releases/vic-act-sa-tas-nt/Statement-regarding-the-employment-of-Prime-Minister-Gillard proves its a lie

  14. The trouble with gate keepers is that they get the idea that they can control what comes through the gate. After a while they start to colourise what they decide comes through the gate. Result we get the crap that has been the Gillard/AWU issue reported by a media intent on biased reportage, and in one instance driven by the policy of the paper doing the reporting.
    Nice example of this in the Sun-Herald today where a well-known Australian entertainer who resides in the UK was reported via Twitter as being interviewed by UK police with regard to the BBC pedophilia matter and released without charge. The name of the person was not mentioned in the Sun-Herald. The report via Vex news in Twitter was that that person was Rolf Harris. My thought when first hearing the news was ‘Oh! Really. Hmmm, wonder what has been uncovered? So they released him without charge — so it looks like there was nothing to answer from his perspective. Well I’ll wait and see what follows.’ I didn’t condemn, nor point the accusatory finger given the material provided, because I understand the process and will wait for further developments before making up my mind. So little -Sun-Herald journo who reported this, and the editor who sanctioned/modified the report in your paper. You have just modified the news to suit your purpose — not mine. And you expect me to treat you with respect? And you wonder why I am contemptuous of you and your reportage.
    I could go on and on with examples of trash journalism in Australian papers, but I won’t. I’ll just say that all hail Twitters and the new on-line media systems because there isn’t a gate, nor a gatekeeper and I actually get to decided on the relevance and truth of the information that I receive.
    You are vanishing because you think that you have the right to colour news with your hype and innuendo — you don’t. Your behaviour is Goebbelsesque and there are lots and lots of intelligent people in Australia who don’t like that kind of behaviour!
    OOOOOOOOoooooooooohhhhh you make me cross!!!!!!!!!!!!

  15. Sadly that was the name that first came to mine this morning. Not because of suspect him of any crime. I do not and would be surprise to find that so. It was because I could think if no one else that fitted the description.

  16. Laurie Oakes mourns the press gallery.
    I don’t, because last week a lot was happening in both houses, MDB plan, NDIS, Gonski Wheat Bill etc. But for the press gallery all that mattered was smear. And if anyone tried to change the subject to what was happening the media got annoyed and said we will talk about that later, time permitting.

    Then last week they had the Walkleys, and McClymont won an award for her Thom(P)son story. For the followers of blogs, Wixxy,IA, there is evidence that MCClymonts “key documents” are bodgie if not downright fraudulent. Now those who select the winners would know the conflict of information.

    Sorry Oakes but that award summed up for me how the msm have gone about creating their own demise.

  17. Lets not forget the pernicious rise of the 24/7 news cycle that never gives either the consumers of the producers of news any time for consideration or real analysis, further there is the matter of collapsing revenues for all types of commercial media which exists to make money not to distribute news and information.
    Finally can I say that the problem with the likes of twitter is that it is drowning under the sea of pointless dross as a billion nobodies tell the universe when they move their bowels or pleasure themselves. Frankly I think that the part of the new media that is yet to really come into its own is the citizen journalist of the Blogosphere who give us more depth that the twits and who have taken the time to develop their craft.

  18. the 24/7 news cycle that never gives either the consumers of the producers of news any time for consideration or real analysis

    rubbish.

    There has been acres of ‘analysis’ over a story 17 years old. What a bullshit excuse for refusing to analyse what is happening now.

    it is drowning under the sea of pointless dross

    Thought you were referring to your (heavily censored) cesspit there 🙂

  19. Tom
    I keep a very light hand on the moderation levers at my blog and as long as your comments are civil and on topic you can make just about any argument you please for or against any thing that is posted there.

  20. as long as your comments are civil and on topic you can make just about any argument you please for or against any thing that is posted there.

    Mine was, yet you blocked it.

    Maybe it cut too close 😉

  21. I couldn’t find Oakes’ article in the weekend Mordor missives. But I think he makes the mistake of assuming that journalistic output is ipso facto of good quality. And it isn’t. They’re a touchy, self referential & self reverential admitted “elite” that at any provocation’s got a square formed before you can say “phone hacking”.
    Oh yes, & go for victim status wherever possible.

  22. Well, I must say., Abbott is indeed very good at playing the victim role. “”She called me sexist, how dare she”” Manages to get it into every speech he has made since that day in QT, when he got told a few home truths,

  23. …..What a small first-world luxury is this sort of absorption in nothingness. How snug we must be to accommodate this indulgence in time, effort and inquiry. Is there nothing else of consequence that might occupy us? No true crisis in our democracy? Our economy? Institutions? No failures of policy? Apparently not. It’s an indulgence made possible by our affluent certainty.

    In all of this, the most uncertain of the involved institutions is the press: a business labouring under all sorts of grim apprehensions at the moment, but hardly making a strong case for any special social indulgence in the past week or two.

    The impression from the outside is of a parliamentary press pack scuttling about its building like Keystone Cops in hot, constant, collective pursuit.

    The political tactic is guilt – or at least the creation of a fair impression of it – through repeated association … it’s a tactic that plays off the herd behaviour of the press. It couldn’t work otherwise.

    An independent, thoughtful and self-confident media might pull the pin on the spiral, but for the moment that seems beyond it. Fear concentrates the journalistic mind. Fear of being beaten, even if it’s only to a shadow of a story.

    We went further down the rabbit hole in Question Time yesterday … more of the relentless pursuit of some sort of incriminating detail over the AWU ‘affair’ from the Opposition. Hectoring, argy bargy and belligerence from both sides, all of it within the professional-wrestling reality of modern parliamentary politics.

    The chamber is a place where blows land but draw no blood. Where anger can be constructed; profound concern, mimed. It’s a performance that is nonetheless reported as though it was, well, real, or at least meaningful.

    There was also yesterday, halting the elaborate pantomime, a motion to suspend standing orders from an impassioned Bob Katter, pleading for an immediate consideration of the consequences of the Murray Darling deal for irrigators. It was by turns crazy, desperate and choked with conviction. His motion to bring on debate failed, but the impression of his honest conviction lingered. It was the stark contrast that set it apart. Conviction, meet confection.

    If anyone wanted a real story of serious human implications, a story grounded in testable fact, they might have looked to the hospital ward on Nauru where on Tuesday 35-year-old Iranian asylum seeker Omid Sorousheh was hospitalised under guard after 47 days of hunger strike. On the same day, four other hunger-strikers collapsed and were given medical treatment in the camp. Nineteen asylum-seekers are currently on hunger-strike. Five of them have also been refusing water.

    That might have been worth raising in the House.

    Jonathan Green hosts Sunday Extra on Radio National and is the former editor of The Drum. View his full profile here……

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-29/green-fear-of-being-beaten-to-the-shadow-of-a-story/4398112

  24. If nothing else, the furious documentation of the Prime Minister’s actions in the AWU slush fund affair have provided ample demonstration of just what might be achieved by an industrious, independently curious and serious-minded fourth estate.

    A fog of detail has been created around this story into which a sense of circumstantial possibility can be inserted. Looked at in the right way, that possibility can almost seem a certainty. Wishing might make it so………….

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-29/green-fear-of-being-beaten-to-the-shadow-of-a-story/4398112

  25. Thank you Min,
    Being able to check facts from the Main Stream Media is a large part of their decline. So many people can now check facts for themselves via the internet and social media sites like Twitter can put you in touch with so many sources of information.
    As a young adult there was no way to be able to do this almost instantaneously so facts,views and opinion where molded by Main Stream Media. But not today, nor in the future. Main Stream Media Models are broken, broken because they were to slow in grasping the significance of the internet.
    Main Stream Media Models for the future raises many questions for them. Many rushing to put up ineffective pay walls. Gee I would of looked at models like Google a long time ago. You do not pay, the advertisers do and they queue to do so.
    As Tony Windsor so simply stated last week “I dont buy The Australian” and “I will have a look if some one gives me one”. Or the best from Tony asked if he would buy The Australian “We buy Sorbent in our household”. Gotta give it to Tony cuts right to the chase.

    PS Denise re; Voyager once again ,,”bias”….”succinct”

  26. I have said it a number of times before, what we need is truth in media legislation like they have in Canada, where Sky news is banned, and they have the most balance reporting as a result of it.

    It does not interfere with the freedom of the press, only makes them be honest about what they write and publish, so opinion has to be nominated as such, and the MSM would certainly show the true colours if they opposed being honest.

    That would certainly give Murdoch the shits. 👿 👿

    Cheers 😀

  27. Cannot even comprehend correctly what is sitting in front of them.

    …..Speaking on national television, Abbott claimed that Gillard had made ‘false representations’ to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission in order to ensure the incorporation of the association. Abbott appeared to base his extravagant claim on an equally extravagant Fairfax report that morning that had all but accused the Prime Minister of fraudulent behaviour, a conclusion drawn by misquoting a document it had in its possession.
    How extraordinary that those same media that had repeatedly demanded that the Prime Minister explain actions and recall meetings from 20 years ago had been unable to correctly describe a document that was right there in front of them.
    By the time Abbott rose during the final Question Time to confront the Prime Minister yet again with recycled claims about her work as a lawyer 20 years earlier, the inaccurate Fairfax report had already been corrected. Given the opportunity to address the House for 15 minutes and substantiate ………….

    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4401340.html

  28. Factless Troll
    DECEMBER 2, 2012 @ 7:38 PM
    Finally can I say that the problem with the likes of twitter is that it is drowning under the sea of pointless dross as a billion nobodies.

    Depends who you follow, its usually the first point of call…Same could be said for the 99% of the Net.

    Frankly I think that the part of the new media that is yet to really come into its own is the citizen journalist of the Blogosphere who give us more depth that the twits and who have taken the time to develop their craft.

    You dont get it..Opinion is not News….1% of Blogs break news and they are attached to newsrooms. I dont want opinion I want fact. Your Blog is NOT NEWS OR JOURNALISM…ITS A BLOG

    We run a show and employ two Journalists with 30 + years experience and a Cadet, someone has to cover the facts. We all have media acreditation, there in lies the difference. Any opinion we preset is from experts, Senior Journalists or Blog? Hmmm I know who I would listen two.

  29. Ricky J Pannowitz

    Finally can I say that the problem with the likes of twitter is that it is drowning under the sea of pointless dross as a billion nobodies.

    Depends who you follow, its usually the first point of call…Same could be said for the 99% of the Net.

    Something we agree about eh?

    Frankly I think that the part of the new media that is yet to really come into its own is the citizen journalist of the Blogosphere who give us more depth that the twits and who have taken the time to develop their craft.

    You don’t get it..Opinion is not News….1% of Blogs break news and they are attached to newsrooms. I dont want opinion I want fact. Your Blog is NOT NEWS OR JOURNALISM…ITS A BLOG

    I was talking about the medium in general not my or any other blog in particular. Further i think that you have vastly overrated opinion of journalism which is quite frankly a dying profession and its modern technology that is killing it. As for the “breaking” of stories being what News is all about well Yer dreamim. You may not like it but the “news” is just another type of entertainment, its all just show business and now that we have essentially instantaneous global communication what do we need some jumped up political ideologue to tell us what is important or what some event means?

    We run a show and employ two Journalists with 30 + years experience and a Cadet, someone has to cover the facts. We all have media accreditation, there in lies the difference. Any opinion we prese(n)t is from experts, Senior Journalists or Blog? Hmmm I know who I would listen two(sic).

    What makes even a senior journalist an “expert” Ricky? is it just taking the Reuters feed and changing a word or two because these days I would say that a good 90 + percent of “news” comes from either regurgitated press releases of off the wire services. All those senior journalists do is offer their opinions.
    So when you get down to it there is not much difference between what a “senior Journalist” and a dedicated blogger does, except perhaps the former has managed to get paid though who can say for how much longer that will be so.

    Let me expand on this point just a little. Now lets say that a pollie makes a speech or an announcement about something that the government is going to do. In the old days to get the message out to the electorate that Pollie would have had to go through a journalist. These days that announcement will be up on the government website and emailed to not only the old media but even to humble bloggers like me, so the substantive facts go direct to the public and that leaves journalists are largely redundant. Remember that its all show business and an entertainment, its only the political tragics who who take your line that its terribly important that there be a class of information gatekeepers to filter the way that events are considered.
    Even natural disasters are more and more being covered by ordinary people with the cameras in the phones which can be more immediate and informative as the footage shot by “professional journalists”.

  30. Jesus H Christ I never ever thought I would agree with Iain Hall. Yep you’re right Iain the MSM is slowly dying a slow death, and yes professional journalism is vastly overrated. That journalists can become filthy rich plying this trade has to ring alarm bells as to who is paying them outside of their direct employers, and for what? But it’s biggest failing is its bias, which you have denied exists. Your point about it being entertainment is true, programs that directly follow the news, under the guise of news information, are tackey Fiberal party policy promoters, and an insult to the intelligence. Take your own mentor, a one Andrew Bolt, this program is the worst example of a propaganda outlet for your beloved Fiberal party shown on the electronic media. It is much the pity it ropes in the mostly gullible right wingers, like your good self.

    But hey don’t get too excited your own blog is still a load of odious tripe.

  31. PJ

    Jesus H Christ I never ever thought I would agree with Iain Hall. Yep you’re right Iain the MSM is slowly dying a slow death, and yes professional journalism is vastly overrated.

    Takes a small bow that a lefty such as you can agree with anything I say! 😀

    That journalists can become filthy rich plying this trade has to ring alarm bells as to who is paying them outside of their direct employers, and for what?

    The era of “star” or “hero” journalists is all but over and the real players in our society know this and they just won’t throw money at them any more.

    But it’s biggest failing is its bias, which you have denied exists.

    You are mistaken I have never said that bias does not exist, on the contrary I say that every journalist is biased in one way or anther and that as long as we are aware of their bias we can decide if what they say is worth while to us.

    Your point about it being entertainment is true, programs that directly follow the news, under the guise of news information, are tackey Fiberal party policy promoters, and an insult to the intelligence.

    I don’t make any distinction between the likes of TDT or A Current Affair and the newsy shows on the ABC or SBS its all entertainment even if the bias runs in different directions they all insult our intelligence to a greater or lesser extent.

    Take your own mentor, a one Andrew Bolt, this program is the worst example of a propaganda outlet for your beloved Fiberal party shown on the electronic media.

    While I certainly do like Andrew’s show I agree that it does have a particular slant it is not trying to pretend otherwise so in many ways that makes it more honest than say “7.30” which claims neutrality but is clearly left of centre.

    It is much the pity it ropes in the mostly gullible right wingers, like your good self.

    I watch the show and make no apologies for doing so however it’s not because I am gullible it’s because it’s entrtaining and amusing. I watch all sorts of stuff that I disagree with for exactly the same reason.

    But hey don’t get too excited your own blog is still a load of odious tripe.

    Well I write what I please there and I get enough readers who enjoy what I write or enjoy disagreeing with me so who could ask for more?

  32. PJ and Iain

    Both correct that media is dying and that journos are biassed. Death of media however is only as we know it today. For mine, it’s evolving into a reciprocal exchange of information where the original writers are called to task on a regular basis when they step out of line. One only has to look at what has happened to Al Gore and his scurrilous press releases where on line bloggers have dismantled his alarmist claptrap bit by deceptive bit to the point that the Doha gabfest is almost an afterthought!

  33. Treeman
    You have a point about the role of the AGW panic in the decline of journalism. If it was not for the dissenting voices of bloggers like Steve MacIntyre running the numbers on Robert Manne we would all be believing the fraud of his hockey stick graph. Where were the old school journalists on that one? in lockstep with the warministas that’s where and now they whine that they are not believed when they drag out some new scare story about the end of the world. 🙄

  34. more honest than say “7.30″ which claims neutrality but is clearly left of centre

    That’s just bullshit. ‘7.30’ is not “left of centre”. The chief political reporter for the show, Chris Uhlmann, is a RWF – a former failed political candidate. In 1989 he contested the ACT Legislative Assembly as a candidate for a RW Christian fundamentalist minor party on an anti-abortion ticket. Uhlmann writes opinion pieces for the conservative magazine The Spectator. He’s a former seminary boy, like his buddy, Abbott. He was fast-tracked into his influential position by ABC Managing Director, Mark Scott, himself a former Liberal staffer (NSW Greiner government).

    During the 2010 election campaign, when Abbott was making excuses to wriggle out of contesting a one-on-one debate with the Prime Minister, he chose Uhlmann by name as his preferred moderator. Knowing how Abbott always needs the cards to be stacked in his favour, it’s clear why he preferred Uhlmann.

    There is no left-leaning show on the ABC. Its right wing bias is almost as blatant as News Limited’s. Even the ABC’s token leftie, Philip Adams, usually avoids political topics, and when he does broach politics, calls in guests from both ends of the spectrum

    Anyone claiming the ABC is left biased is deluded or lying – both traits of course we expect from RWnuts.

  35. Oh Tom surely you don’t believe such a shallow attempt at whitewash?

    so you think its OK to ignore the dendro climate proxies into the modern era because they are contradicted by the instrumental record and do not match the AGW theory ? That its OK to mix data from two different sources to misrepresent the veracity of the data?

    Yeah that would be OK then would it?

    Grow some reasoning ability Mate!

  36. Iain Hall
    DECEMBER 4, 2012 @ 6:36 AM

    Something we agree about eh?

    Same in any media..its a no brainer. THe Blogoshere is not the media anymore than Australias got talent is the Entertainment industry.

    I was talking about the medium in general not my or any other blog in particular. Further i think that you have vastly overrated opinion of journalism which is quite frankly a dying profession and its modern technology that is killing it.

    No Journalism is a craft, a bad tradesman does not blame their tools. Technology is no more killing Journalism than it is anything else. Lazyness, opinion, and ideology is killing journalism as most journalists are more interested in being celebrities and have forgotten what reporter means.

    What makes even a senior journalist an “expert” Ricky? is it just taking the Reuters feed and changing a word or two because these days I would say that a good 90 + percent of “news” comes from either regurgitated press releases of off the wire services.
    No sorry that is so far from reality its laughable. We need outr people at the conferences taping and asking questions. Its about resources. We are offered stories when we are rewarded for our trust and integrity. Our senior journalists, One is the Editor in Chief of ACP and one is one of the most senior writers in the country are connected through trust and credibility. For us its all about reporting, fact and truth with our resources. My brother shadow writes for people and gets access to people based on his reputation a credible journalists. He wont touch stuff that is dirt as it is harmful to our brand, we leave that to channel 9 and the telegraph.

    A bloger watching, listening or reading a newsfeed is not a journalist they are a plagiarising regurgitator.

    Let me expand on this point just a little. Now lets say that a pollie makes a speech or an announcement about something that the government is going to do. In the old days to get the message out to the electorate that Pollie would have had to go through a journalist.

    No if you have accreditation you can report. You dig through press releases (the wire in the old days) you report. You know those microphones in the press conference..That’s us….

    Even natural disasters are more and more being covered by ordinary people with the cameras in the phones

    Yeah well thats technology at play….An interview with an eye witness, background, stats and an explanation by a expert on the subject makes it jounalism…

    Journalism is not Dead, like the film and music industry, its just in a state of flux. Homemade media on mass is delusional self promotional opinion or pub talk. I don’t want to read unprofessional Journalists or bloggers anymore than I want to watch armature bands or films.

  37. “I don’t want to read unprofessional Journalists or bloggers anymore than I want to watch armature bands or films.”

    With all respect Ricky what you watch is irrelevant. Guess what ,professional bands start off as amateurs, I know that salient point because I have been a muso for thirty years. Many amateur movie makers have won awards.

    I think you have a misguided view of the tangible worth of journalists in society. They if they are doing their job, report events that have actually happened and any five year old can do that. When they start to use hypotheticalcals, navel gazing, spin, and a crystal ball, there in lies the problem, and is why some journalists are being treated with utter contempt. It is contrary to what you believe, certainly a dying occupation.

    Iain I am not going to get into a long winded debate with you about the media, It has a right wing bias, especially in the area of the electronic media, shock jocks etc, that is a scandal in this country. To deny the glaringly obvious fact, borders on delusion. No matter what you say, will not change, what only a moron would deny is the reality.. It has got nothing to do with perception it is a reality end of.. You only deny this obvious reality, because it favours your side of the political fence.

    Your observations about any influence by the media to change the facts about global warming is arrant nonsense. As each day passes and it is becoming more obvious there is a problem, and governments will be forced to act on it, people like you with their Neanderthal views on the subject, will/are being treated like village idiots.

  38. Ricky J Pannowitz @ 2:33 pm
    Firstly thank you for the civil tone of your comment, it is much appreciated, and I will respond in kind with civility 😉

    Same in any media..its a no brainer. THe Blogosphere is not the media any more than Australia’s got talent is the Entertainment industry.

    I have never suggested that the bloggosphere is “the media ” but like Australia’s Got Talent its part of it and not something that is entirely unrelated

    No Journalism is a craft, a bad tradesman does not blame their tools. Technology is no more killing Journalism than it is anything else. Lazyness, opinion, and ideology is killing journalism as most journalists are more interested in being celebrities and have forgotten what reporter means.

    The aphorism is I believe that a bad tradesman DOES blame his tools technology has all but destroyed or diverted teh “rivers of gold” that has for the last hundred years financed the craft of journalism and those dry rivers will not flow again and with out fertilising gold how can traditional journalism survive? Especially when the talent constantly by pass your porecious jounalists by using say social media to spread their Message. Obama announcing his victory in the last presidential election on twitter should send a shiver down the spine of anyone who thinks that journalism matters.

    No sorry that is so far from reality its laughable. We need our people at the conferences taping and asking questions. Its about resources. We are offered stories when we are rewarded for our trust and integrity. Our senior journalists, One is the Editor in Chief of ACP and one is one of the most senior writers in the country are connected through trust and credibility. For us its all about reporting, fact and truth with our resources. My brother shadow writes for people and gets access to people based on his reputation a credible journalists. He wont touch stuff that is dirt as it is harmful to our brand, we leave that to channel 9 and the telegraph.

    What is “shadow writing” please Ricky? It sounds a bit dodgy and misleading to me. That said it sounds like an old boys network from your description rather than something to be respected as a mode of truth telling. Now from your previous comments its pretty clear where you stand on the political compass so why should the consumers of the stories that you tell believe that those stories are even handed and unbiased? Frankly I would still rather have the info straight form the horses mouth instead of having it pre digested through the ideological filter someone like yourself.

    A bloger watching, listening or reading a newsfeed is not a journalist they are a plagiarising regurgitator.

    You know what Ricky I absolutely agree that a blogger is not a journalist, however the way that they discuss the issues is not substantially different, and as for your suggestion of plagiarism well that is a nonsense especially when we bloggers take the time to both differentiate and properly attribute anything that we quote (it would help if you could do so as well do you know the usual HTML prompts?)

    No if you have accreditation you can report. You dig through press releases (the wire in the old days) you report. You know those microphones in the press conference..That’s us….

    Accreditation = club membership

    It means almost nothing these days and it will mean even less into the future.

    Yeah well that’s technology at play…an interview with an eye witness, background, stats and an explanation by a expert on the subject makes it journalism…

    That is just window dressing Ricky all the people really want to see is the footage and footage that does the business is getting both more common and vastly cheaper and with the ubiquity of 24 hour news its not hard to see that it takes no talent and little skill to ask someone what did ya see? most chosen to do such things on air are picked for a pretty face an a winning smile more than anything else these days

    Journalism is not Dead, like the film and music industry, its just in a state of flux. Home-made media on mass is delusional self promotional opinion or pub talk. I don’t want to read unprofessional Journalists or bloggers any more than I want to watch amateur bands or films.

    Dare I suggest that your regular appearances here contradicts your claims of indifference and disdain to the blogging medium?

  39. PJ

    Iain I am not going to get into a long winded debate with you about the media, It has a right wing bias, especially in the area of the electronic media, shock jocks etc, that is a scandal in this country.

    What media do you consume to on a regular basis PJ?

    To deny the glaringly obvious fact, borders on delusion.

    We have a quite diverse media in this country as far as I can see, all have their biases and not all of it leans to the right as you want to suggest. Take SBS for instance there are shows on there that make the Greens look like fans of Alan Jones and on Radio national we have the likes of Fran Kelly, Phillip Adams and a whole raft of lefty commentators, on the ABC local radio service we have the likes of Jon Faine and many more from the same mould. They all have their biases and I’m fine with that I deny nothing about “right wing bias” on some commercial services. In other words bias is inevitable and unavoidable, just be aware that it exits, maybe even celebrate the fact that we have so many choices of which biased opinions we consume because media without bias is just unachievable,

    No matter what you say, will not change, what only a moron would deny is the reality.. It has got nothing to do with perception it is a reality end of.. You only deny this obvious reality, because it favours your side of the political fence.

    The media has tended to favour Labor far more that it has favoured the coalition during the course of may life time I’m Ok with that because I understand about swings and roundabouts.

    Your observations about any influence by the media to change the facts about global warming is arrant nonsense. As each day passes and it is becoming more obvious there is a problem, and governments will be forced to act on it, people like you with their Neanderthal views on the subject, will/are being treated like village idiots.

    I am not saying the media can change facts, any-more than the Warministas can change the climate. With China going gang busters burning ever more coal each and every year nothing that is done in the west will make a scrap of difference, now if we assume for the sake of argument that the AGW proposition has legs(I doubt this but please hang in here and follow the argument) then any treasure and effort that we spend on futile mitigation is a waste of time effort and money because we would never be able to do enough to make an iota of difference to the outcome. In that sort of scenario then I would take a cue from Bojrn Lomborg and devote resources and effort to adaptation rather than mitigation move more of our people to newly subtropical Tassie and change the way that we do our agriculture, where we live and even the times of the day that we work (a seista in the hotest part of the day sounds sensible)

  40. I am not going to get into a long winded debate with you about the media, It has a right wing bias, especially in the area of the electronic media, shock jocks etc, that is a scandal in this country. To deny the glaringly obvious fact, borders on delusion.

    Well said. Scandal. In Australia we’ve got an effectively two-party political system and a one-party media.

    If anyone disputes that assertion, please name one pro-Labor mainstream media outlet. Good luck with that….

    The situation of a major party being without media advocacy is almost unique in a “democracy”. Yes, America’s got Fox “News”, but for balance there are Democrat-leaning outlets such as MSNBC and the New York Times and Huffington Post. Italy’s media is dominated by Berlusconi holdings, but even in that environment there are progressive-leaning mainstream outlets.

    Here – zilch. Even the previously-impartial ABC has been steered over to the (far) right to huddle with the commercial outlets.

    It gives the conservatives an advantage that cannot be measured.

    Of course they NEED such advantage to survive electorally with their radical anti-progressive agenda.

    Speaking hypothetically… Take out the media bias, and the conservative extremists would be finished as a mainstream political force. They’d have to either become moderate in a hurry.. or be wiped out in a single election.

    As it is currently, they rely on the media for survival. They’re the ultimate media welfare case.

  41. Iain your contention that Fran Kelly is a lefty is the funniest thing I’ve real all week.

    I consume all media, yes and the blogs where I get a better aspect and understanding on what people are thinking. As I said there is a right wing bias in the media here that cannot be denied. For you to keep arguing there isn’ is part of the reason why nobody takes you serious. Some subjects Iain are that obvious they are beyond debate.

    Your last paragraph is not worthy of a reply, except this, we are going to pay a high price for the current level of the rape of this planet, we are on borrowed time. Absolutely nothing you can say is going to change that very salient fact. We are on the verge of another G.F.C that is going to make the last one look like we are a week behind on our car payment. That is just the start of what’s to come.

    And before you start insulting my intelligence, what is coming down the pike has got nothing to do with the Labor party. If by some black joke we ended up with another two terms of Howard?Costello we would be in the same boat.

    So save yourself the possible pain of finger RSI and don’t bother replying. You are easier to read than a cheap paperback novel.

  42. Cuppa

    @ 4:04 pm

    Well said. Scandal. In Australia we’ve got an effectively two-party political system and a one-party media.

    If anyone disputes that assertion, please name one pro-Labor mainstream media outlet. Good luck with that….

    You confuse the fact that even the left leaning media like the ABC is critical of the woeful Gillard Government with it being a creature of the coalition. It isn’t that at all its just you find it hard to comprehend why they can’t support Labor through thick and thin as they used to. Maybe the fault is with Labor on this rather than the media…

    Here – zilch. Even the previously-impartial ABC has been steered over to the (far) right to huddle with the commercial outlets.

    The ABC is still of the left its just that they are too embarrassed by Gillard’s ineptitude to turn a blind eye any more.

    It gives the conservatives an advantage that cannot be measured.

    That is nonsense, because you over estimate the influence of the media on the electorate and ignore the litany of wrong headed decisions made by Labour in office, and the fact that most swinging voters in the ‘burbs don’t even watch the ABC.

    Of course they NEED such advantage to survive electorally with their radical anti-progressive agenda.

    Is the so called “progressive agenda” really that laudable? Please explain what precisely constitutes the ‘progressive agenda” in your opinion.

    Speaking hypothetically… Take out the media bias, and the conservative extremists would be finished as a mainstream political force. They’d have to either become moderate in a hurry.. or be wiped out in a single election.

    Labor would still loose because the people believe that Gillard is innately untrustworthy and that her’s is a terrible government

    As it is currently, they rely on the media for survival. They’re the ultimate media welfare case.


    P.J. @ 4:16 pm

    Iain your contention that Fran Kelly is a lefty is the funniest thing I’ve real all week.

    You must be a Greens supporter if you think that Fran Kelly is a conservative !

    I consume all media, yes and the blogs where I get a better aspect and understanding on what people are thinking. As I said there is a right wing bias in the media here that cannot be denied. For you to keep arguing there isn’ is part of the reason why nobody takes you serious. Some subjects Iain are that obvious they are beyond debate.

    There speaks your own confirmation bias!

    Your last paragraph is not worthy of a reply, except this, we are going to pay a high price for the current level of the rape of this planet, we are on borrowed time. Absolutely nothing you can say is going to change that very salient fact. We are on the verge of another G.F.C that is going to make the last one look like we are a week behind on our car payment. That is just the start of what’s to come.

    Well blame the Chinese not those of us who point out that the “solutions mooted by your fellow Warministas can not possibly do any good even if the theoretical foundations of your millenarian fears are well founded. It is an empty and expensive piety

    And before you start insulting my intelligence, what is coming down the pike has got nothing to do with the Labor party. If by some black joke we ended up with another two terms of Howard?Costello we would be in the same boat.

    So save yourself the possible pain of finger RSI and don’t bother replying. You are easier to read than a cheap paperback novel.

    Well If I am easy to read then read on Mcduff! 🙂

  43. At long last, the media has noticed. Wonder what would have been the reaction if the Jackson group won the day. Not a mention of the lady.

    ….The new boss of the Health Services Union (HSU) in NSW has vowed to hold his organisation accountable to the highest corporate standards.

    ‘We are not required to do that, but we want to do that,’ Gerard Hayes told ABC Radio on Tuesday.

    The union’s new general secretary also declared over an era of in-fighting and self indulgence.

    ‘It is all about our members now,’ he said……

    http://www.skynews.com.au/national/article.aspx?id=822919

  44. Do we really want the truth, or what fits in with our own, bias beliefs. Could some of this be the truth.

    Michelle Grattan suggested last week that what we really wanted to hear from Gillard about the affair was something more personal and less guarded. I don’t know anything about what Julia Gillard’s relationship was like with Bruce Wilson, none of us do really, but when I imagine what a genuine response might be like, when I try to picture the cartoon thought bubble above her real head, I imagine its contents to be something like:

    “I was young and stupid with lust. I thought I was boring and he made me feel exciting. That had never happened to me before and I‘d thought it never would. I wasn’t thinking clearly about a lot during that time. I’m not sure what I remember from that time and what I don’t. He broke my heart, trashed my reputation and took forever to publicly defend me. I’m embarrassed by how I was then, and having to go over and over it all again here feels grossly unfair and incredibly humiliating.”

    Well of course she can’t say that, even if it were true. Because in general we’re not mature enough to bear a political leader who betrays significant vulnerability. We may think we want her to speak the truth, but there’s no real forum for that kind of truth. There’s nowhere safe to speak it.

    Even in our own private lives we’re often so guarded. And that’s really the kicker. Because we so regularly fail to present our real selves, to say clearly when we’re angry, hurt, in love or fearful and why, we can spend a lot of time being resentful at being unheard and unrecognised. This leaves us open to an interest in petty point scoring and abusive time wasting. Since we’re not willing to name our own hurts, we at least want to see someone else taken down. Like people with aggressive dogs who can’t seem to rein them in, we let our politicians fight our dirty little battles for us, while the real issues are allowed to sink to the bottom of the ocean.

    Because of course while we’re busy making space for debasing political tennis matches, there are real issues that could be claiming our attention. These pressing concerns, which include the devastating warming of the planet and the forced destitution and institutionalised isolation and despair of people coming to our shores seeking asylum, are not simply current political issues, they are our own personal ones as well. They make up part of the world for all of us. They are part of the world we have helped to create.

    But there’s no point in calling for more decorum. This isn’t about the need for everyone to pull their socks up and play nice. The fact that the antics currently being played out in Parliament are a distraction from life threatening crises is not an accident. It’s a reflection of how most of us learn to divert our attention from our own responsibilities. We keep score, blame, dismiss, gnaw at the sore spots we see in front of us and focus on the spectacle of other peoples’ bad behaviour.

    So while we’re waiting for something “real” to come out of the mouths of our politicians, while we’re bemoaning parliamentarian behaviour and crying out for a return to greater politeness and the facts of the matter, do we really know what we’re asking for?…

    http://newmatilda.com/2012/12/04/do-we-want-drama-or-decorum

  45. Ricky and,

    No Journalism is a craft, a bad tradesman does not blame their tools. Technology is no more killing Journalism than it is anything else. Lazyness, opinion, and ideology is killing journalism as most journalists are more interested in being celebrities and have forgotten what reporter means.

    Your comment brought to mind a statement made by a high profile journalist a while back, that journalists “these days” did not have time for investigative journalism and he once again blamed the new communications media for this (Perhaps an excuse for their regurgitation of Liberal Party press releases :roll:).

    To my mind, one does not exclude the other..Obama might tweet his win but clearly anyone who wants to know the stats, the opinions then one would aim for something a little meatier.

    Woe is me, I cannot keep up due to the pressures of the job is not an excuse. Oakes bemoans the changes. I would say learn to live with it, treat it as tool to be used to one’s best advantage. Video did not kill the radio star..

  46. Cuppa @ 5:11 pm

    The ABC is not left leaning media. You’ve got no case.

    That all depends on how you define left leaning though doesn’t it? Now it seems to me that you think that something has to be analogous to the “Green Left Weekly” for you to consider it “left leaning” But in the real world we understand that there is a whole range of things that come between that extreme and more conservative media. thus if I say that the ABC is more to the left than say the OZ but not as far to the left as Fairfax media would you think that fair? I am truly curious how you define your terms here, oh and a civil answer will be appreciated.

  47. Iain Hall
    December 4, 2012 @ 3:32 pm
    The aphorism is I believe that a bad tradesman DOES blame his tools
    Correct but it kind of works the other way…
    technology has all but destroyed or diverted the “rivers of gold” that has for the last hundred years financed the craft of journalism
    Well the jury is still out on that one. Diverted is a good term as advertising revenue is bigger than ever, there has been a paradigm shift as to where the delta is. We have had to think of new ways of selling advertising and its far more profitable for as we now deal direct with the client. New Media has stopped the 50 pages of shit in the paper and replaced it with websites of the product source. This demise of revenue can be attributed to two primary issues. 1: Bad business models and 2: Resistance to change and invest in building new media strategies. To give you an idea, you can only fit so much advertising on a web page, pre roll adds on video’s are a new source of revenue for papers (who gear up for video) but they lose all the print stuff (down between 30-50%) Did you know that Google mads just under 50 million from advertising in Australia last year and paid 75 grand tax?. They sell Australian companies ads through a Irish shelf company that has an incorporation in the Caymans.
    There is an enormous take up rate of tablets and lots of people are opting for the “e” version on a tablet or smartphone. It means less money for the outlet. Its hard to make a generation of people pay for something when they don’t place a value on much at all, music film ect.
    Radio is falling fast. Its one of the worst dinosaur industries out there. Our costs are 1l10th the cost of a similar program on a network so we make money.
    Obama announcing his victory in the last presidential election on twitter should send a shiver down the spine of anyone who thinks that journalism matters.
    Not really it just hypes it all more and gives them more crap to write about for better or worse.
    What is “shadow writing” please Ricky?
    It’s as old as the trade itself. Lots of celebrities have shadow writers write articles for them as politicians have speech writers and comedians have joke writers. The Telegraph is famous for it. No names though .
    You know what Ricky I absolutely agree that a blogger is not a journalist, however the way that they discuss the issues is not substantially different,
    Let me be crystal clear here, I’m all for the blogosphere and I agree with you in as far as it empowers people to discuss issues further. Technology has provided this and will continue to do so. It serves as a point of contact for like minds to gather. 20 plus years ago it was Bulletin Boards. It’s another layer of discussion that Like TV and Radio is like Bruce Springsteen’s song “57 channels and nothing on” Blogs are forums of dynamic duplex dialogue, media outlets are one way conversations which inform and inversely misinform the blogosphere.
    Accreditation = club membership
    Well no, you need to be published to get accreditation. I you don’t cut it in the first year your toast. Our company is small and we have managed it because we have a hit show with a huge listener base. We get our accreditation because of our network and listener base. Don’t forget the last thing someone wants in a media conference is some mug bleating on crap when deadlines and media needs to get out. It’s a huge exercise executed with military precision. You earn your accreditation. My brother is doing the Golf at the moment and it’s a multimillion dollar event with 200 journalists from around the globe in a huge media centre. Accreditation means a spot, internet, coverage, food ect so you earn it. That being said lots of media conferences are walk up starts but they do have security so be nice or get turfed.
    Dare I suggest that your regular appearances here contradicts your claims of indifference and disdain to the blogging medium?
    Not at all. I like this blog, I read a few others and moderate two tech forums. For me it’s a good gauge of how far people are willing to go without a fact. I wade though tons of spin weekly and you become numb to it. I have never seen the truth lose any point made in real debate, however it seems irrelevant in the blogosphere. For the most part this blog is very factual, enough to entice your interest. I think your problem is you think you know how the media actually works and probably know enough to be dangerous. You leyt your ideology influence your anayisis and that is the number one no no in media. I have met and cant stand Mark Lathum,, however he is a fantastic writer. Your ideology is clouding your judgement of perceived bias which just does not wash. Bolt Whacky man and Jones are standing in the river of gold being populous, they are performers not journalist’s.

  48. Guys let me just say that The ABC is still the yardstick for Journalism in Australia. If you think its left, its probably saying what you don’t want to hear. I know I cant stand the Drum anymore, Its a parade of idiots masquerading as expert panel, very aggressively Right wing at times….
    4 corners, Insiders, 730 report, Lateline, Inside Business, Asia pacific forum are all quality programs. Were lucky to have News 24 on free to air and an excellent ABC radio network..Bless Aunty

  49. That all depends on how you define left leaning though doesn’t it?

    I’m pretty sure most here would define it as ‘leaning to the left’

    It is quite apparent that you appear to think that it is anything to the left of bolt.

  50. Ricky @ 11:04 pm

    technology has all but destroyed or diverted the “rivers of gold” that has for the last hundred years financed the craft of journalism

    Well the jury is still out on that one. Diverted is a good term as advertising revenue is bigger than ever, there has been a paradigm shift as to where the delta is. We have had to think of new ways of selling advertising and its far more profitable for as we now deal direct with the client.

    And I think that advertising saturation has made more of the public immune to the “charms” of advertising

    New Media has stopped the 50 pages of shit in the paper and replaced it with websites of the product source. This demise of revenue can be attributed to two primary issues. 1: Bad business models and 2: Resistance to change and invest in building new media strategies.

    I take it that you are talking about the business model for media companies? My brother is in the food business and he tells me that he is much more cautious about his advertising spend to promote his products. So I think that another factor is a a far more aware business sector that wants a better bang for their buck.

    To give you an idea, you can only fit so much advertising on a web page, pre roll adds on video’s are a new source of revenue for papers (who gear up for video) but they lose all the print stuff (down between 30-50%) Did you know that Google mads just under 50 million from advertising in Australia last year and paid 75 grand tax?. They sell Australian companies ads through a Irish shelf company that has an incorporation in the Caymans.

    Yeah I understand that all companies do their darnedest to pay as little tax as they legally can but I also think that many companies are ignoring mass advertising altogether in favour of more targeted direct contact with their potential customers. Online focused business like the Games company I buy from are good examples of this trend. I get regular emails from them with their new products and I actually take the time to read them and when I am ready to buy a new game I go straight to their website via a link in one of those emails.

    There is an enormous take up rate of tablets and lots of people are opting for the “e” version on a tablet or smartphone. It means less money for the outlet. Its hard to make a generation of people pay for something when they don’t place a value on much at all, music film ect.

    Yeah I get that but as someone who remembers vinyl albums with some fondness for its art work and presentation.

    Radio is falling fast. Its one of the worst dinosaur industries out there. Our costs are 1l10th the cost of a similar program on a network so we make money.

    But on the other hand as a consumer of radio its a great medium for entertainment and intellectual engagement while you go about the mundane tasks in your life. Personally I like to listen to Auntie but my kids want to listen to commercial FM radio and of course that means I have to endure it and its very often just an awful experience with ads that are revoltingly forgettable

    Obama announcing his victory in the last presidential election on twitter should send a shiver down the spine of anyone who thinks that journalism matters.
    Not really it just hypes it all more and gives them more crap to write about for better or worse.

    My point was taht we are going to see more and more of the political talent communicating directly with the public just because the technology makes that both easy and cost effective, one thing you have to admire about Obama is his grasp of the potentials of the social media as a political tool and teh simple fact taht it means that a candidate does not need to pay a third party in promises or money to get right into the pockets of your voters.

    What is “shadow writing” please Ricky?

    It’s as old as the trade itself. Lots of celebrities have shadow writers write articles for them as politicians have speech writers and comedians have joke writers. The Telegraph is famous for it. No names though .

    Oh I would have called that Ghost writing Ricky 😉


    You know what Ricky I absolutely agree that a blogger is not a journalist, however the way that they discuss the issues is not substantially different,

    Let me be crystal clear here, I’m all for the blogosphere and I agree with you in as far as it empowers people to discuss issues further. Technology has provided this and will continue to do so. It serves as a point of contact for like minds to gather. 20 plus years ago it was Bulletin Boards. It’s another layer of discussion that Like TV and Radio is like Bruce Springsteen’s song “57 channels and nothing on” Blogs are forums of dynamic duplex dialogue, media outlets are one way conversations which inform and inversely misinform the blogosphere.

    Oh I know what you mean by the 57 channels thing, especially as I have been blogging for the last seven years but likewise when you do this stuff every day you do learn the craft, how to present a page and how to attract an audience, more importantly how to keep them engaged. In some ways a blogger has to be more like a media outlet than just a journalist. This is why many blogs end up failing an the web is littered with dead blogs that no one ever reads and that are never updated. You are right though about the two way dialogue being the core of blogging its why this blog will succeed while others will fail Migs and Min etal have managed to create a lively forum for discussion which is interesting and inclusive of diversity. That is something that is rather unusual in the normally very tribal bloggosphere.

    Accreditation = club membership

    Well no, you need to be published to get accreditation. If you don’t cut it in the first year you’re toast. Our company is small and we have managed it because we have a hit show with a huge listener base. We get our accreditation because of our network and listener base. Don’t forget the last thing someone wants in a media conference is some mug bleating on crap when deadlines and media needs to get out.

    Its still just like “club membership” though isn’t it?

    It’s a huge exercise executed with military precision. You earn your accreditation. My brother is doing the Golf at the moment and it’s a multimillion dollar event with 200 journalists from around the globe in a huge media centre. Accreditation means a spot, internet, coverage, food ect so you earn it.

    Golf, is a good walk spoilt as far as I’m concerned and like all sport reporting what is said is mostly crap and I am reminded of a Monty Python skit where the commentators go on and on about an intractable grass stain on a bowler’s trousers.

    That being said lots of media conferences are walk up starts but they do have security so be nice or get turfed.

    Yep I agree that there is great value in civility and good manners

    Dare I suggest that your regular appearances here contradicts your claims of indifference and disdain to the blogging medium?
    Not at all. I like this blog, I read a few others and moderate two tech forums. For me it’s a good gauge of how far people are willing to go without a fact. I wade though tons of spin weekly and you become numb to it.

    I appreciate that

    I have never seen the truth lose any point made in real debate, however it seems irrelevant in the blogosphere. For the most part this blog is very factual, enough to entice your interest. I think your problem is you think you know how the media actually works and probably know enough to be dangerous.

    Hmm I do OK in understanding the media Ricky, I don’t claim perfect insights but I tend to be right more often than I’m wrong.

    You let your ideology influence your analysis and that is the number one no no in media. I have met and cant stand Mark Lathum,, however he is a fantastic writer.

    Actually I am far from what would be considered “conventionally” ideological but I agree that there are good word-smiths on all sides of the political compass

    Your ideology is clouding your judgement of perceived bias which just does not wash. Bolt Whacky man and Jones are standing in the river of gold being populous, they are performers not journalist’s.

    All journalist have to be performers these days Ricky or they will not be heard or seen no matter how clever and insightful their copy may be.


    Ricky @ 11:18 pm

    Guys let me just say that The ABC is still the yardstick for Journalism in Australia. If you think its left, its probably saying what you don’t want to hear.

    Well I am a long term fan of the ABC who thinks its more left than right(or centre) because that is how I see it leaning, that said its bias is consistent and known and its no impediment to my listening pleasure.

    I know I cant stand the Drum any-more, Its a parade of idiots masquerading as expert panel, very aggressively Right wing at times….
    4 corners, Insiders, 730 report, Lateline, Inside Business, Asia pacific forum are all quality programs. Were lucky to have News 24 on free to air and an excellent ABC radio network..Bless Aunty

    There are not enough hours in the day for me to watch much of that stuff but I agree that we should bless auntie!
    Tom R @ 6:31 am

    It is quite apparent that you appear to think that it is anything to the left of bolt.

    Bolt is not really that “right wing” Tom even so you do seem to be agreeing with me that defining right or left depends very much on where the definer stands on the political compass themselves.

  51. Open letter to ABC managing director Mark Scott

    …The IPA is infesting every ABC outlet with its Libertarian Free Market ideology in the service of secret Business business. What are they providing “balance” for? Have there been Marxist economists daily on the ABC I have somehow missed? Even Keynesian economists? Er…no. Professor Sloan is on every week instead. Who is she “balancing”?

    What about the appearance of Peter Reith every week? A full essay on The Drum plus other live appearances. Who is he balancing? Gerard Henderson, Piers Akerman, Nikki Sava? Has there been a rash of appearances by Trotskyists, Socialist Alliance, Left Wing unionists who have escaped my notice?…

    http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/business/media-2/open-letter-to-abc-managing-director-mark-scott/

    ABC left-leaning?? – More delusion and falsehood from the RWFs.

  52. Tom R. No, he is in a world of his own. Cannot see past his own nose. We can only hope there are not many of him. Talk about being the lowest denominator in society. I cannot think of any lower.

  53. Wayne Swan PC ABC 24. It appears to be positive. Does not fit in with Hockey’s assessment.

    Reasons being given. Maybe Mr Hockey should listen. May learn something. Yes, there are problems but much to be proud of….
    Growing at annual rate of 3.1

  54. Hockey is not smiling, as he was yesterday and today. Slowest growth since GFC. So it did exists. Once again, the negative.

    All the point of the carbon tax. Nothing about what is happening overseas or commodity prices. Nothing that the boom is coming off. All negatives. Remember this is what is not in the report, but his own assumptions he is putting on it.

    Electricity prices. Wonderful how two people can read the dame document, and get opposing views.

    Who is undermining business etc, confidence. Suggest, it just maybe Mr. Hockey.

    Will need miracles. Yes, we will indeed if that man gets his hand on the economic rudder.

    Questions.

    Does not look happy at all. If banks not listening, why would they listen to the government. The question, why would one listen to Mr. Hockey.

    They listen to us. .bah bah bah

  55. Now blaming the government for the decrease in bank competition, which is the direct result of the GFC, which Mr. Hockey had just admitted, existed.

  56. Hockey says RBA has lied.

    Well he must have because Hockey said banks have borrowing difficulties while yesterday the RBA said: “Australian banks have had no difficulty accessing funding, including on a non-secured basis”

  57. sue, have you noticed, our visitors do not bother getting involved in current matters, only that from the dark past.

    Hockey was very jovial, until those figures that have been produced. A little better than expected, I would say.

    Saying that, I am not saying there are no problems in the winds. Sadly there are. It worries me, that the opposition does not see this, but continue in their campaign, talking the economy down, placing all the blame on the MRRT and price on carbon emissions, which are not causing the problems that are coming. Nothing at all.

    If one cannot properly diagnose the problems, how can they apply the cure. If one takes the wrong medication, it can quickly kill one.

  58. Sue, it defies logic..even from my zilch knowledge of things economic, why with Australia’s AAA credit rating would Australia’s banks have difficulties borrowing.

  59. Cu, the opposition are just continuing with their modus operandi of win at all costs and who the hell cares about the future of the country…after all Abbott did insist that Howard was his mentor (even tho’ Howard was on the verge of upchucking at the thought of this).

  60. AAA from three agencies. Hockey managed to used that fact this morning to be negative, Something about using it’s AAA ratings, to compete with the banks and other businesses in borrowing. Gee they would find a negative in the Blessed Mary.

  61. the other good news productivity up, wages not up

    So no problems with IR, that’s no good news for coalition

  62. Yes, slowed down, as all expected, going the wrong way, no.

    But Sue, it is for Mr. Hockey. They desperately need the economy in disarray.

    Otherwise they have no election campaign

    The economy has to nose dive, so they can blame MRRT and the cost on carbon emissions.

    They will look the fools they are.

  63. Funny that many do not know, that interest rates are only positive, when they are above the inflation rate, as they are now.

    If my memory is correct, that has not happened very often, in living memory.
    .

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s