On ABC bias
In groundbreaking research in 1995 and 1998, John Henningham, a
professor at Queensland University published a couple of papers on
journalists' perceptions of bias and the ideological differences between
them and their public.
What is striking about the research is
that the journalists clearly rated the ABC as pro-Labor, indeed as the
most pro-Labor of the major media outlets. In this light, indignant
protests that the ABC is balanced become plain silly.
Similarly,
to deny that there is a large gap between ABC presenters and their
audience is simply unsustainable after Henningham surveyed 173
journalists and 262 members of the public in metropolitan Australia. He
found an enormous difference between these two groups, with journalists
consistently having a much more "progressive" views than the general
public. The denial in the ABC has reached a point it does even bother to
attempt balance. Albrechtsen has clearly outlined the major offenders.
With the polls suggesting a Gillard wipeout, there is a feeling of "end
of days" denial in the ABC and they, like Gillard, are going for broke.
And former ABC chair Maurice Newman
On November 24, Robyn Williams intoned to his audience on ABC's The
Science Show, "if I told you that pedophilia is good for children, or
asbestos is an excellent inhalant for those with asthma, or, that
smoking crack is a normal part and a healthy one of teenage life, you'd
rightly find it outrageous. Similar statements are coming out of
inexpert mouths again and again, distorting the science". My article was
given as an example of an anti-scientific position.
Really?
Questioning climate science is like advocating pedophilia, abetting
mesothelioma and pushing drugs to teenagers? Well yes, according to the
ABC's science man. Stephan Lewandowsky, a guest on the program, asserted
that those with a free market background were, according to his
research, more likely to be sceptical of science. As well as climate
science, "they are also rejecting the link between smoking and lung
cancer; they are rejecting the link between HIV and AIDS", the professor
said. Happily, it was extremely difficult to detect people on the "Left
side of politics who are rejecting scientific evidence".
...
In March 2010 as chairman, I addressed an in-house conference of 250
ABC leaders. In a speech titled "Trust is the future of the ABC", I
asked, "how might we ensure in our newsrooms we celebrate those who
interrogate every truth?" I lamented the mainstream media's role as an
effective gatekeeper. It was too conformist and had missed the warning
signs of financial failure. I blamed group think and used climate change
as an example. My mistake was to mention climate change.
While
most company chairs would find the tenor of my talk unremarkable,
Jonathon Holmes, the presenter of Media Watch, was so angry "he could
not concentrate". He found it an inappropriate forum for such remarks. I
was interviewed by PM and teased as to whether I was a "climate change
denier or not as obvious as that?" As a further censure, that night Tony
Jones read a statement on Lateline saying: "Tonight, ABC management
responded to Mr Newman's speech, saying it stands by the integrity of
its journalists and its processes."
The Left lives in a bubble. Many would hardly know anyone, much less engage in robust dialogue, with a different viewpoint.
No comments:
Post a Comment