Doug Cameron sets the standard at your ABC

If you listen to, watch or read material produced by the ABC, you will encounter people you disagree with, arguments you will reject and opinions that enrage.

That’s Mark Scott – ABC managing director – describing the 100% taxpayer funded organisation he heads up. That’s fine – but all the time?

Then there is this:

Our editorial policies are not about pulling out a stopwatch or doing a head count of guests.

No doubt. Yet this tells me that the ABC deliberately chooses not to ensure balance in time devoted to issues or equal numbers of guests with differing perspectives. It makes no attempt to even measure balance.

But:

As Doug Cameron remarked at a recent Senate estimates hearing, Insiders panels all looked well to the Right to him.

I’m just not convinced that the opinion of one left-wing Senator is enough for the ABC to claim it has discharged its obligations under the Charter.

Wait there is more:

The appearance of Peter Reith as a guest or someone who works with the Institute of Public Affairs unleashes a new flurry of criticism and abuse.

While I am convinced that Peter Reith – a private citizen – and Chris Berg, James Paterson and Tim Wilson from the IPA are a match for many, many hundreds of tax-payer funded bolshies and luvvies from the ABC I remain unconvinced that the efforts of these fine individuals are enough for the ABC to claim it has discharged its obligations under the Charter.

As an aside, the federal government allocated one thousand, one hundred and eighty-eight million dollars to the ABC in the last budget. The IPA gets by on about two million – yet Scott would have us believe that the IPA is the counter-balance to the ABC’s unrelenting left bias.

There is, however, a very simple test of the ABCs commitment to a plurality of views. Where is Glenn Milne? Why was he dropped from Insiders? The answer is clear, of course. A wholly owned government funded agency dropped a critic of a left-wing government from its leading political show. Not that they have ever dropped any left-wing critics of the Howard government.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

121 Responses to Doug Cameron sets the standard at your ABC

  1. johno

    The question isn’t where is Glenn Milne. The question that their ABC needs to answer is where are the conservative or free market presenters and producers of their mainstream news and current affairs programs? They have plenty of presenters with a Labor Party connection – Cassidy worked for Hawke, Red Kerry worked for Gough, McKew was a high profile Labor candidate in the 2007 election, Chris Ulhman is married to a Labor senator. where is the equivalent list of presenters with similar Coalition connections.

    Or is their ABC going to run the ‘we don’t consider a persons politics when we employ people, we just employ left wingers.’

  2. jupes

    If you listen to, watch or read material produced by the ABC, you will encounter people you disagree with, arguments you will reject and opinions that enrage.

    Spot on Mark.

  3. jupes

    I will believe the ABC is seriously trying to fulfil its charter when Bolt, Blair or Henderson get the gig on Media Watch.

  4. MattR

    This guy just basically insulted half the population of the country. By claiming the clearly left wing biased ABC is ‘balanced’ is basically saying that anyone who votes to the right has views that don’t matter or count in his eyes.

    If he thinks the ABC is balanced, surely he can point out all the conservative and right wing libertarian hosts? Surely you could tally up the Q&A/Insiders panels and show that there were an equal number of guests from the right and left. Surely he could do those things.

    The fact that nobody claiming the ABC is balanced can actually show evidence to prove it. Yet those claiming it is biased to the left can point to the FACT that every host (bar one on a show hidden on a radio station not many listen too anyway) is left leaning and pretty much every panel discussion is either completely leftist or has maybe one token conservaitve, is telling. Why are taxpayers forced to pay for a broadcaster that in no way represents their views?

  5. Rabz

    Where is Glenn Milne? Why was he dropped from Insiders?

    He was dropped by the ALPBC because of his front page piece in the Oz on 29 August 2011, entitled:

    PM A LOST CAUSE FOR WARRING UNIONS

    This was merely the first attempt by the lobotomised luvvie meeja to protect their beloved lardarse dullard from exposure of her role in the AWA slush fund affair. Micahel Smith was also sacked by Fuaxfacts about the same time.

    Oh, and dog cameron is a braindead commie c*@#…

  6. 2dogs

    The are many government bodies around the world which prohibit their employees from being members of political parties.

    Given their charter requirement for no bias, perhaps this is a good idea for the ABC as well.

  7. Ant

    I love the IPA.

    Of the organisations I have been a member of, the IPA is the highlight. All power to them.

    And stuff the ABC.

  8. Token

    I will believe the ABC is seriously trying to fulfil its charter when Bolt, Blair or Henderson get the gig on Media Watch.

    LOL

    Can you imagine what those guys would do with the budget and staff numbers “Blankets” squanders?

    You can bet their work week would start well before the Friday afternoon ambush calls.

  9. Rabz

    If he thinks the ABC is balanced, surely he can point out all the conservative and right wing libertarian hosts?

    I hear that the hippie deadshit john faine (for a hippie deadshit he is) is extremely adept at identifying conservatives employed by the ALPBC…

  10. Token

    This guy just basically insulted half the population of the country.

    This is standard for an organisation where the key stakeholders are the employees, not the customers or owners.

    Many a great organisation had similar opinions in the last months before their fall – General Motors, etc.

  11. Bruce

    Mark Scott is not reading the danger signs.

    If you infuriate half or more of your funders, who are forced to involuntarily contribute to your bias, then you risk a backlash.

    Should the conservative side of politics become completely pissed off by the ABC it will do something irreversible when it gets in.

    Mark you are killing your own village to save it. This is not a winning strategy.

  12. .

    This was merely the first attempt by the lobotomised luvvie meeja to protect their beloved lardarse dullard from exposure of her role in the AWA slush fund affair. Micahel Smith was also sacked by Fuaxfacts about the same time.

    You almost feel sorry for them, fawning over such an incompetent failure.

  13. jupes

    Should the conservative side of politics become completely pissed off by the ABC it will do something irreversible when it gets in.

    We can only hope. However the reality is they don’t have the balls. Howard, who was happy to engage in the ‘culture wars’, did precisely nothing.

  14. Cold-Hands

    Given their charter requirement for no bias, perhaps this is a good idea for the ABC as well.

    I seem to remember La Trioli claiming that she always voted informal so she was not partisan. Although she certainly took umbrage when Maxine McKew showed her colours.

    I can imagine what Gerard Henderson will say this Friday. His running scorecard of ABC Conservatives during Mark Scott’s tenure is a regular feature on Media Watchdog.

  15. W154

    [Unnecessary commentary. Sinc]

  16. H B Bear

    Finally Doug Cameron finds someone who takes him seriously and not simply an overblown caricature of a wukka who walked off a Pommy coal mine sometime in the 1960s.

  17. We shouldn’t be taxing the poor to fund the ABC.

    Wealthy socialists can afford to watch pay TV.

  18. Huckleberry Chunkwot

    I can imagine what Gerard Henderson will say this Friday.

    Unfortunately Cold Hands, Nancy and her owner are taking a WEB (Well Earned Break) and won’t be back until the new year.

  19. Judith Sloan

    Something that has not been picked up is the change that was made to the Editorial Policies of the ABC which permits its presenters to leap into print, generally on The Drum, but sometimes elsewhere, presenting us with their own personal political views on topics. Our Barrie is very addicted to this activity.

    In my day … do I sound like an old fogey? … ABC presenters and journalists were not permitted to write pieces except with the express permission of their supervisor. This was rarely given and would generally only be in the context of a benevolent activity such as a particular charity.

    Now we know precisely what Barrie, Fran, Leigh and others think on policial topics and their views on political leaders. In my opinion, this is just not on and the whole lot of them should be shown the door now.

    As for Scott’s apologia, maybe he should try his hand in comedy … because his op-ed gave me a chuckle or two because of his complete denial of the reality.

  20. Mike of Marion

    Notice how Scott has uttered these statements when Bolt, Henderson and I dare say others, have closed up for the Festive Season.

    Catallaxy, Michael Smith and Pickering are still out and about at present to allow these Scott statements to be challenged.

  21. Christian

    Don’t worry, chaps. There’s no real lefties on the ABC either. If there were, we’d have people on there who actually presented views left of centre.

    We don’t.

    You’ve got the upper hand in the newspapers and blogs, we’ve got Twitter, and you’re convincing yourself that the ABC is anything but a shadow of a former self long since faded. You’re better off letting it self-immolate, popularise and celebrate bombast as it does. All Q+A does is make Turnbull popular.

    Or is that a problem too?

  22. .

    1. Close down the ABC and sell off the inventories.

    2. Voluntary voting.

    Most of the ALP zombies will return to their graves.

  23. Anne

    I will believe the ABC is seriously trying to fulfil its charter when Bolt, Blair or Henderson get the gig on Media Watch.

    Drum roll… ” Media Watch with your Host Andrew Bolt”. Thanks Jupes. That fantasy is better than the one where I win the lottery and start dating Charles Krauthammer. What??? I think he’s sexy!

  24. Alfonso

    Yes, yes…..I’m with Dougie and Scotty

    Give the IPA a taxpayer funded TV and radio empire so Their ABC can “balance” it on a level playing field.

    Scotty is having a lend, no-one on the street has even heard of the IPA.

  25. Huckleberry Chunkwot

    Another great Trioli moment.

    Verily……….

  26. steve from brisbane

    These points have all been made before:

    1. as m0nty has said, this blog is not “centre Right”. Look at the number of times Sinclair and the IPA have abused the Liberals this year for not toeing their line fast enough. Look at the way commenters this last year have gone – obsessed with abortion; appalling attacks on women if they are not of the Right; a “joke” just a day or two ago about how good it would feel to spit on Gillard, and a high school standard of attack on the few moderate Left voices that can still bother commenting here.

    Culturally, it’s very much in line with the uglier strands of the American Tea Party – perhaps with a bigger strand of very conservative Catholicism. (And my, how attractive many of them make their brand of that religion look [/sarc])

    2. Because you are not centre Right, you think everyone in the media that is not in agreement with you is a “bolshie”, Left luvvie or a sell out to the Right. Sinclair’s hyperbole speaks for itself.

    3. Where is the Australian Right wing media talent that is frustrated by its inability to get a TV or radio show on the ABC?

    Has anyone listened to Counterpoint since it’s been trying out a range of alternative hosts? They have all been terrible as broadcasters.

    Even those who love Andrew Bolt for his views have said he technique was pretty average for most of the first year of his show.

    Can I be permanently banned from this blog?

    My desire to come here and tell you what a place for ratbags it has become is something I fear I cannot overcome myself.

  27. .

    You are semi illiterate, Shit for Brains.

    Australia’s leading libertarian and centre-right blog

    I truly hope this is a “teaching moment” for you.

  28. C.L.

    As Doug Cameron remarked at a recent Senate estimates hearing, Insiders panels all looked well to the Right to him.

    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  29. Huckleberry Chunkwot

    Can I be permanently banned from this blog?

    steve from brisbane
    13 Dec 12 at 10:38 am

    Sinc, from the horses mouth itself.
    This seems to be a case similar to the Victorian gaming self exclusion laws, please do us all a favour and grant his wish.

  30. tbh

    Karl Marx was to the right of Doug Cameron. FMD he’s a moron.

  31. Sinclair Davidson

    Hell, no. Suffer.

  32. Anne

    Can I be permanently banned from this blog?

    That sums up the socialist mindset nicely.

    Somebody STOP ME from having thoughts and expressing them. Take away by Freedom of Speech pleeease! I’m afraid … knees quivering… arms going floppy … (yeah that…) can’t take responsibility for… self determination… wah…wah…Nanny…Nannieeeee!

    Gillard sends stimulus cheque. Steve settles. Good boy Steve, nice and quiet.

  33. Tiny Dancer

    My desire to come here and tell you what a place for ratbags it has become is something I fear I cannot overcome myself.

    Sorry fuckhead, thats a battle you lost ages ago. That blog of yours still an uninhabited desert? Still scaring your kids, stealing bread, supporting criminals in government? Go and get lunch started.

  34. Huckleberry Chunkwot

    Hell, no. Suffer

    Him or us Sinc?

  35. Token

    as m0nty has said, this blog is not “centre Right”.

    As M0nty and Steve from Brisbane refuse to define what they mean by “left” and “right” his statement can be treated as a load of tripe as you can see that the whole premise of his statement is only Steve & M0nty are “correct” and the other blog contributors are not.

  36. cohenite

    you think everyone in the media that is not in agreement with you is a “bolshie”, Left luvvie or a sell out to the Right

    That is not a comprehensive list; for instance many who disagree with me are idiots, sanctimonious fuckwits, ordinary fuckwits, sophists, ideologues, flibbertigibbets, philiosophuncionalists, nitwits, Dunning–Kruger sufferers, smartarses, arseholes, shitheads, supercilious twits, useful idiots, intelligent idiots and clever fools.

  37. Sinclair Davidson

    He is suffering more than me.

  38. Gab

    Well done, SFB. You’ve netted nine comments so far.

  39. Token

    My desire to come here and tell you what a place for ratbags it has become is something I fear I cannot overcome myself.

    FFS, what more needs to be said?

    The statist demands someone else to save him from his own lack of self control.

  40. H B Bear

    If ever anyone has the intestinal fortitude to wade through the incestuous couplings between the unions, the ALP and the ALPBC there will be more hook-ups between them than the Legover Man’s family album. Not enough spaghetti for the meatballs. Even the other walking cadaver Greg Combet is able to pull some ALPBC tail.

    Judith @9.41am At least The Dumb has an editor, even if it is in the emasculated form of Mr Anne Summers. If you want mainline bias go to the source, Twitter. ALPBC Perth’s Geoff Hutchison is back after a few problems a couple of years ago.

  41. H B Bear

    My desire to come here and tell you what a place for ratbags it has become is something I fear I cannot overcome myself.

    I’m sure Nanny Roxon and Nurse Plibersek can help.

  42. lotocoti

    Where is the Australian Right wing media talent that is frustrated by its inability to get a TV or radio show on the ABC?

    The ABC is where you go when you’re not too keen on working for a living.

  43. Can I be permanently banned from this blog?

    My desire to come here and tell you what a place for ratbags it has become is something I fear I cannot overcome myself.

    tl;dr “I wish I knew how to quit you. I CAIN’T QUIT YOU!”

    Chucklehead.

  44. Anne

    The statist demands someone else to save him from his own lack of self control.

    That’s what I said diddle I.? ©

  45. Toiling Mass

    I frequently hear people who champion the ABC making the claim, not that the ABC is balanced, but that it instead balances the imagined right-wing-bias of the commercial networks. Being private enterprises it is assumed the commercial networks have a right wing bias.

    At bottom they also harbour a belief that the right wing (synonymous with capitalism) always has an advantage in terms of finance to present its message, and the thus besieged left needs taxpayer money just to be on an equal footing.

  46. Anne

    “I wish I knew how to quit you. I CAIN’T QUIT YOU!”

    LOL . Hysterical! That’s why he keeps coming back. There’s no humour on the leftist blogs.

  47. Eddystone

    I think that “Left” refers to the mindset that prefers government action to balance perceived inequalities of income or opportunity.

    But what does “Right” mean? It seems to be used as a generic insult against anyone who questions government spending, but there must be a better definition than that?

  48. Mother G

    Almost spat the coffee over the keyboard while reading the sweet words from the ABC about balance. What a hoot, or it would be if not so serious. If I were the MD I would keep thr rural stations and sell off the rest, then we would see how the precious things fare in the commercial world. It would be valium all round.

  49. Sinclair Davidson

    This is how Michael Oakeshott describes being conservative. A different definition to, say, Hayek – but still pleasing.

    … to prefer the familiar to the unknown, to prefer the tried to the untried, fact to mystery, the actual to the possible, the limited to the unbounded, the near to the distant, the sufficient to the superabundant, the convenient to the perfect, present laughter to utopian bliss.

  50. Is ‘Right’ the same as ‘Conservative’?

  51. candy

    I prefer the usual terms Labor or Liberal/Conservative as it helps me understand the differences, but this current Labor Party is going down the path of encouraging an entitlment attitude in Australians and divisiveness, more so than any other Labor government before. They are changing tack (the wrong way in my opinion), whereas the conservatives remain with their identity, kind of solid.

  52. Sinclair Davidson

    Is ‘Right’ the same as ‘Conservative’?

    Sometimes. Sometimes not.

  53. Eddystone

    A couple of years ago, The Australian ran a series of articles, “What’s Left?”, with a contribution from Duckbum.

    They never got around to a “What’s Right?” series.

  54. Toiling Mass

    It seems to me that ‘right’ is used as an odd sock drawer for all that is not ‘progressive’, hence conservatives and libertarians are both labelled as ‘right’.

    Whilst a conservative might baulk at drug legalisation as risky, while a libertarian might consider it something propoerly a right (and concomitantly a responsibility), the fact that these opposed opinions are not in the progressive cause makes both points of view, the them, ‘right wing’.

  55. grumpy

    As Doug Cameron remarked at a recent Senate estimates hearing, Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao all looked well to the Right to him.

    caveat: He may not have actually said this.

  56. Jannie

    Time was when my TV was welded to the ABC. Now the very sound of their received pronunciation makes me want to puke, literally. Change the laws, I want to sue them for offending me.

  57. Steve of Glasshouse

    Steve of Brisbane..as one Steve to another, go the cilice.
    You know it’s the right thing to do..

  58. Rococo Liberal

    Is ‘Right’ the same as ‘Conservative’?

    Yes. When the ‘c’ is upper case the two terms are equivalent. It is probably easier to use the term “Tory” as it has no other meaning that the p[olitical one, whilst ‘conservative’ has a dfirrent meaning in political contexts than it does in other contexts.

    Sinclair, being bitter old economist, is not really that interested in etymology or the subtle use of languae, so don’t listen to him on such points :)

  59. Token

    That’s what I said diddle I.? ©

    Yes, but it was so amazingly stupid (actually the norm for SoB) that I had to underline the point.

  60. Jim from Brisbane

    Doug Cameron’s comment is particularly relevant for Mark Scott.
    For both of them, the actual centre in terms of mainstream political and social opinion is well to the right of where they perceive it to be.
    And the problem isn’t simply lack of diversity of opinion but also a reflexive response to virtually any issue from a left-wing prism.
    On gay marriage, there isn’t any legitimate perspective other than discrimination and injustice.
    On environmental issues, the views of paid advocates for Greenpeace, WWF or the IPCC are naturally more truthful and altruistic than those of industry.
    On industrial relations, business is always exploitative and uncaring where its workforce is concerned.
    Unless Scott is actually prepared to confront this over the top of the objections of the guardians of this narrow focus, nothing will change.
    It’s actually not that hard.
    Appoint Tim Blair or Andrew Bolt as the next host of Media Watch.
    Ask Tom Switzer to host Insider Business.
    Ensure Q&A audiences are invited from randomly selected individuals from the electoral roll and Tony Jones shares the Chair role on and off with Joe Hildebrand.
    Have 7.30 genuinely co-hosted via equal time by Sales and Uhlmann.
    These are all within the prerogative of the CEO and destined to create howls of outrage from only one side of the political divide?
    Tells you something doesn’t it?

  61. Is ‘Right’ the same as ‘Conservative’?

    The left wants to control what you do with your money.

    The right wants to control what you do with your dick (or female equivalent).

    Conservatives don’t want you to change what you are doing with either.

    (And just for completeness, libertarians don’t want to control what you do with either.)

  62. manalive

    Poor old Mark Scott has got to say what he has otherwise it looks like he isn’t running the joint for which we pay him over $750,000 per year.
    Of course everyone knows the place is run by powerful staff cliques, especially within news and current affairs.

  63. cohenite

    $750K; fuck me, just when you think it couldn’t get any stupidier.

  64. Lysander Spooner

    So Mr Scott’s subtext is “Some pigs are more equal than others.”

  65. H B Bear

    Much of Chris Uhlmann’s balance arises only when seen alongside Sale’s Walkley award winning partisan shrieking.

    Mr Gai Brodtmann is just another part of the giant union-ALP-ALPBC conglomerate.

  66. Jazza

    I wouldn’t give Doug Cameron the time of day. I actually forced myself to read the Hansard where he attacked Alan Joyce and that was enough for me to now I need to live without humourless, autocratic , communist scum taking charge of anything in my beloved country, for that’s exactly what he portrayed in that interview!
    I think he needs to go back to the Scottish mines or wherever he came from.

  67. Steve of Glasshouse

    Personally, I blame the TV series Taggart for this mess.
    Prior to that , no one could understand Dougie, and he was ignored

  68. m0nty

    I’m just not convinced that the opinion of one left-wing Senator is enough for the ABC to claim it has discharged its obligations under the Charter.

    I’m just not convinced that the opinions of a shower of right-wing ratbags like this is enough for the ABC not to claim it has discharged its obligations under the Charter.

    There is, however, a very simple test of the ABCs commitment to a plurality of views. Where is Glenn Milne? Why was he dropped from Insiders?

    Milne was dropped because he aired actionable material despite advice against it. He is a loose cannon, has been for years. Why has the Oz only run one article of his since August 2011 when the fecal matter hit the fan, with Chris Mitchell making it clear that it was a one-off? He’s now working in his wife’s consultancy firm, seemingly out of journalism.

    If there’s a conspiracy to blacklist Milne, then Murdoch and Mitchell are in on it.

  69. cohenite

    Media and the public dissemination in this country is precarious. The Bolt adjudication by the Press Council headed by that well known rationalist Disney gave this Judgement:

    Press Council Adjudication
    Herald Sun, December 13, 2012

    THE Press Council has partially upheld complaints about an Andrew Bolt article on climate change.

    The Australian Press Council has released the following adjudication.

    The Council has considered several complaints about an article by Andrew Bolt, “Time that climate alarmists fessed up”, in the Herald Sun on 1 February 2012.
    The same article also appeared in Mr Bolt’s blog on the Herald Sun website under the heading, “Open your eyes. Where’s that warming?”.

    The article opened by saying “let’s see how the great global warming scare is panning out, shall we?
    First, the planet hasn’t warmed for a decade – or even 15 years, according to new temperature data from Britain’s Met Office”. A later sentence began: “Sea levels have recently dipped, the oceans have lately cooled, Arctic ice has not retreated since 2007 …”.

    Three people complained separately to the Council that the article contained a number of misrepresentations.
    A key complaint related to the assertion that the Met Office data showed no warming in the last 15 years.
    The assertion had been made on 29 January in an article by David Rose in the UK newspaper Mail on Sunday.

    The Met Office responded on the same day that “for Mr Rose to suggest that the global temperatures available show no warming for the last 15 years is entirely misleading”.
    The complainants also said that because the changes in sea and ice conditions mentioned by Mr Bolt were relatively short-term and minor they did not refute the longer-term trends in the opposite direction.

    Therefore, they said, his statements gave a misleading impression.

    The newspaper said that although Mr Bolt had drawn on the Rose article he had been unaware of the Met Office response.
    In any event, it said, that response was not incompatible with his statement that average temperatures were now no higher than 10 or 15 years ago.

    The newspaper said that data provided by one of the complainants actually supported Mr Bolt’s assertions about recent changes in sea and ice conditions, even if there had previously been trends in the opposite directions.

    It added that the assertions were clearly expressions of opinion, which Mr Bolt was entitled to express.

    It said that a letter from one of the complainants criticising the article had been published a few days afterwards, and some criticisms had been published in the blog’s comment section.
    The Press Council has concluded that Mr Bolt was clearly entitled to express his own opinion about the Met Office data but in doing so he needed to avoid conveying a misleading interpretation of the Met Office’s own views on its data.

    In a blog posting two days earlier (29 January) he had quoted Mr Rose’s assertion about the lack of warming and a reader then posted a comment referring him to the Met Office’s description of that assertion.

    The Met Office description should have been mentioned in Mr Bolt’s print article and blog of 1 February, even if he then rebutted it as unconvincing.
    It was not sufficient in these circumstances to assert ignorance of the response or to rely on the reader’s previous posting to inform other readers about it. Accordingly, the complaint is upheld on that ground.

    The Council has concluded that the statements by Mr Bolt quoted above in relation to sea and ice conditions were likely to be interpreted by many readers as indicating that the longer-term trends had ceased or were reversing.

    It agrees with the newspaper that Mr Bolt’s assertions about recent changes in sea and ice conditions were statistically compatible with the key data sources put forward by the complainants.
    But it agrees with the complainants that those data were also statistically compatible with continuance of the longer-term trends in the opposite directions from the shorter-term changes to which he referred.

    Pauses and even reverses in direction do not necessarily signify the end of a long-term trend and have occurred in earlier stages of the trends in question here.
    Given the great public importance of these issues, Mr Bolt should have acknowledged explicitly that all of the three changes in question were comparatively short-term and were statistically compatible with continuance of the long-term trends in the opposite direction.

    On the other hand, the article referred to the possibility that global warming has merely “paused” and it emphasised the need to “keep an open mind” on these issues.
    Accordingly, despite concerns about the manner in which the available evidence is presented, the Council’s decision is not to uphold these aspects of the complaint.

    The Council emphasises that this adjudication neither endorses nor rejects any particular theories or predictions about global warming and related issues.
    It observes that on issues of such major importance the community is best served by frank disclosure and discussion rather than, for example, failure to acknowledge significant shorter- or longer-term trends in relevant data.

    As Des Moore notes:

    It is difficult to take seriously the so-called adjudication, the implication of which is that if one writes an assessment of climate data one has to provide an adequate reference to the views of the alarmists. Yet, as all sceptics are aware it is rare for an article by an alarmist to offer more than a passing reference to views of sceptics, notwithstanding the substantial analysis that supports those views.

    And even those “passing reference[s]” are usually derogatory. For instance Matthew England, a fervent alarmist, was interviewed on the ABC recently. England claimed the IPCC predictions about temperature made in 1990 have been verified by observations.

    This demonstrably untrue.

    Complaints cannot be made to Disney’s crew about the ABC but you can imagine the result of a complaint made to the ABC about coverage of a topic such as AGW which is not balanced.

    So, where does one go to complain about something like England’s views being promoted, in effect, without any critical appraisal?

  70. Bruce

    and were statistically compatible with continuance of the long-term trends in the opposite direction

    Cohenite – Now every time a warmist like Mr Cubby or Mr England says the world is warming he can be taken to the Press Council and be required to state in every article that the data is also statistically compatible with short term and long term cooling.

    Of course Disneyland isn’t compatible with actual science, so I don’t think I’ll exert myself to complain.

  71. .

    If there’s a conspiracy to blacklist Milne, then Murdoch and Mitchell are in on it.

    So is Gillard, fuckhead.

  72. .

    Libertarians are the only humans who don’t want to control anything?

    Yes. You have flat learning curves, Norm.

  73. m0nty

    Look elsewhere for your loony conspiracy theories, Dot. Milne was dropped like a stone by News Ltd. If you’re alleging that they’re in on the con, you’re being even more ridiculous than usual.

  74. mct

    Personally, I blame the TV series Taggart for this mess.
    Prior to that , no one could understand Dougie, and he was ignored

    I do like this new, improved, version of the “Steve”!!

  75. Chris

    1. as m0nty has said, this blog is not “centre Right”.

    +1. Catallaxy is about as centre right as LP was centre left. Political oriented centrists blogs are pretty hard to find, perhaps because extremes are more popular or at least encourage a lot of debate :-)

  76. .

    Is monty mendacious, a blockhead, or both?

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/am-call-that-put-pms-old-news-on-front-page/story-fn59niix-1226128513341

    NATIONAL AFFAIRS
    8am call that put Julia Gillard’s old news on front page
    BY: INSIDE STORY EWIN HANNAN From: The Australian September 03, 2011 12:00AM
    Increase Text Size
    Decrease Text Size
    Print

    APPROACHING 8am last Monday, John Hartigan was walking into his office after a session of boxing, stairs and weights at a park in Sydney’s inner-city Glebe when his mobile phone rang. It was Julia Gillard.

    “I presume you know why I’m calling,” the Prime Minister said.

    Hartigan, chairman and chief executive of News Limited, had no idea. He soon did, as the Prime Minister voiced her displeasure at the publication that morning in The Australian of a column by Glenn Milne, which revived 16-year-old allegations about Gillard’s one-time relationship with former unionist Bruce Wilson.

    According to Hartigan, Gillard put a series of demands that she wanted addressed in 15 minutes. The deadline was later pushed back to 9am.

    As well as a public apology and the Milne article being taken offline, she wanted a commitment that the allegations never be repeated again in The Australian. This demand was later extended to all News Limited newspapers and their websites.

  77. m0nty

    Did Gillard include in that list of demands a blacklisting of Milne, Dot? No. All she was worried about was that actionable allegation.

  78. .

    What a crock of shit, monty.

    She won’t answer in Parliament where she was on the day she signed the documents for the AWURA.

    She actually thinks a slush fund is a good look.

    She’s not worried about being fingered for stealing money from orphans and widows?

    She’s not suing anyone. She’s worried about polling.

  79. m0nty

    Right, Dot swears and tries to change the subject, thus indicating that he has comprehensively lost the argument, once again.

  80. Token

    a shower of right-wing ratbags

    As noted above, as M0nty never confirms what he means by “the right” it is code for he is always right.

    Enjoy the stacked dialog.

  81. Token

    Catallaxy is about as centre right as LP was centre left.

    Chris, what does “right” and “left” mean to you?

    Please define it. Is it the standard per the French parliament in the 1790′s? Is it the left/right during the communist era?

    When I say “left” I mostly refer to statists and types that do not see free speech and property rights may be infringed for “the greater good”.

  82. Token

    When I say “left” I mostly refer to statists and types that do not see free speech and property rights may be infringed for “the greater good”.

  83. .

    You are such a pathetic, low rent spin doctor. When you lose change strategy. You are spouting the same shit in every thread now.

    No one ever claimed a conspiracy. All I did was say if there was a conspiracy, Gillard would be on it – hence her phone call to Hartigan. Well duh.

    You don’t even understand that your hypothetical arguments are wrong you twit, you start believing that your interlocutors believe in conspiracy theories you have fallaciously assigned to them, even when they argue against their validity.

    Why would Rupes collude with Gillard about one bloke when he’s let so much shit about Thomson and Gillard pass through?

    Let me reiterate:

    She won’t answer in Parliament where she was on the day she signed the documents for the AWURA.

    She actually thinks a slush fund is a good look.

    She’s not worried about being fingered for stealing money from orphans and widows?

    She’s not suing anyone. She’s worried about polling.

    so monty, what do you think of people who steal from orphans and widows?

  84. m0nty

    No one ever claimed a conspiracy. All I did was say if there was a conspiracy, Gillard would be on it – hence her phone call to Hartigan.

    You’re going to need a bigger microscope to show us the hair you just split.

    Milne has effectively withdrawn from journalism, not because of the halting of his rare appearances on Insiders, but his mothballing by News Ltd. Murdoch paid his wages for the most part, not the ABC. If you want to blame a vast left wing conspiracy, look first at News Ltd. Comrade Rupert is obviously the ringleader, quoting Mao’s Little Red Book and stroking Mr Bigglesworth in his nuclear bunker two miles under Wapping.

  85. .

    You’re going to need a bigger microscope to show us the hair you just split.

    Really? Then why would you bring up a conspiracy theory no one frigging believes in?

    That was precisely the point – you’re full of shit.

    You are a pathetic, mendacious, street team troll, and stupid to boot.

  86. m0nty

    Really? Then why would you bring up a conspiracy theory no one frigging believes in?

    Sinc put forward the ABC left-wing conspiracy theory in the last paragraph of the OP, and you lot all believe it.

  87. .

    Yes, and you included News Corp as well, you snivelling little dissembler.

  88. m0nty

    My point is that Sinc’s conspiracy theory about Milne is stupid because it was News that nixed his career, not the ABC.

  89. .

    There is, however, a very simple test of the ABCs commitment to a plurality of views. Where is Glenn Milne? Why was he dropped from Insiders? The answer is clear, of course. A wholly owned government funded agency dropped a critic of a left-wing government from its leading political show.

    Sinclair wasn’t focused on where his career ended, but that Insiders is a mouthpiece of the ALP and Greens.

    You know the difference. Stop bullshitting.

  90. m0nty

    Try this as a counter:

    There is, however, a very simple test of the ABC’s commitment to a plurality of views. Where is Andrew Landeryou? Why is he blocked from Insiders? The answer is clear, of course. A wholly owned government funded agency shuns a critic of right-wing parties from its leading political show.

    Milne has about as much credibility as Landeryou these days. News and Insiders were well within their rights to drop him.

  91. m0nty

    Sinclair wasn’t focused on where his career ended, but that Insiders is a mouthpiece of the ALP and Greens.

    He accuses Insiders of dropping Milne because of its left-wing bias. But why did News drop him as well? Is it due to their left-wing bias?

    Let me explain it to you, Dot. Neither the ABC or News dropped Milne for reasons of political bias. They both dropped him because of his lack of professionalism: to wit, his willingness to print actionable material in the face of contrary advice.

  92. .

    He accuses Insiders of dropping Milne because of its left-wing bias.

    Yes.

    But why did News drop him as well? Is it due to their left-wing bias?

    We don’t give a fuck.

    Neither the ABC or News dropped Milne for reasons of political bias. They both dropped him because of his lack of professionalism: to wit, his willingness to print actionable material in the face of contrary advice.

    Lies. it has all been put in the open, now Gillard is “too busy” to sue.

    Milne might be unprofessional. I don’t care.

    You are such a suckhole, monty.

  93. m0nty

    We don’t give a fuck.

    News Ltd does.

    Milne might be unprofessional. I don’t care.

    News Ltd does.

  94. .

    News Ltd does.

    News Ltd does.

    He (Sinclair) accuses Insiders of dropping Milne because of its left-wing bias.

    WTF are you actually on about, monty?

  95. Podsnap

    From the pen of Monty

    Try this as a counter:

    There is, however, a very simple test of the ABC’s commitment to a plurality of views. Where is Andrew Landeryou? Why is he blocked from Insiders? The answer is clear, of course. A wholly owned government funded agency shuns a critic of right-wing parties from its leading political show.

    Milne has about as much credibility as Landeryou these days. News and Insiders were well within their rights to drop him.

    How about this as a counter.

    Milne – Your mate the PM has Milne sacked because he is pushing a very newsworthy story that she helped Wilson defraud a union.

    Landeryou – comes up with a lot of irrelevant slander on Blewitt who finally had the decency to tell the truth about the AWU affair – bullshit like he’s a sex tourist etc. And your mate the PM has the balls to parrot all this garbage in Parliament.

    So in the credibility stakes we have -

    Milne – plenty
    Gillard, Landeryou, Monty – fuck all

  96. Cold-Hands

    Neither the ABC or News dropped Milne for reasons of political bias. They both dropped him because of his lack of professionalism: to wit, his willingness to print actionable material in the face of contrary advice.

    m0nty, you’re thinking like a lone blogger eating krispy kremes. Milne’s article was legalled and approved by News Ltd- the very fact it appeared in The Australian meant that it had editorial approval: he did not act unprofessionally. Milne was pulled because of TLS’s phone call and threats which created such a climate of fear at News over potential regulation that Milne elected to leave journalism rather than starve. Michael Smith left Fairfax because he didn’t believe in being muzzled. Given that more documents have surfaced supporting their allegations, Insiders should apologise, but Hell would probably freeze over first.

  97. Podsnap

    Cold Hands – I think Monty thinks that bringing up the allegations against Gillard was ‘unprofessional’ – perhaps tantamount to treason.

    Big no-no in any respectable news room.

  98. Gab

    This si the article by Minle that had gillard ring the Australian several times, screeching and threatneing them. The Australian apologised and removed the article. I cannot see why gillard overreacted in such a toitalitarian fashion.

    ” It is about to get worse as elements of the Australian Workers’ Union seek to settle up with Thomson’s accusers by demonstrating that Gillard herself was implicated, albeit unknowingly, in a major union fraud of her own before she entered parliament.

    On Friday, Michael Smith of 2UE contacted me to check the veracity of material in a statutory declaration drawn up by Bob Kernohan, the former president of the AWU, and dealing with the relationship between Gillard and Bruce Wilson, which I outline below.

    On Saturday, Herald Sun and Daily Telegraph columnist Andrew Bolt wrote on his blog: ‘‘On Monday, I’m tipping, a witness with a statutory declaration will come forward and implicate Julia Gillard directly in another scandal involving the misuse of union funds. Gillard herself is not accused of any misbehaviour at all. I do not make that claim, and do not hold that belief. But her judgment — and that of at least one of her ministers — will come under severe question. She will seem compromised. It could be the last straw for Gillard’s leadership.’’

    Big call. But I do have a good deal of knowledge regarding Bolt’s claims. On Sunday November 11, 2007, just days before the November 24 election I interviewed Gillard, then deputy leader of the opposition, in my capacity as political editor for News Limited’s Sunday newspapers. The interview concerned the embezzlement of union funds — not disputed — and later the subject of a court conviction by a former boyfriend of Gillard, Bruce Wilson. I had researched the piece for months. It was the most heavily lawyered article I have ever been involved in writing. The story said that as a solicitor acting on instructions, she set up an association later used by her lover to defraud the AWU. But she has strenuously denied ever knowing what the association’s bank accounts were used for.

    Gillard, then in her early 30s, was a lawyer with Melbournebased Labor firm Slater & Gordon. At the time of the fraud she acted for the AWU. She met Wilson, then the West Australian AWU secretary, while representing the union in the Industrial Relations Commission. Wilson later moved to Melbourne to become Victorian secretary of the union.

    ‘‘These matters happened between 12 and 15 years ago,’’ Gillard told me. ‘‘I was young and naive. I was in a relationship, which I ended, and obviously it was all very distressing. I am by no means the first person to find out that someone close turns out to be different to what you had believed them to be. It’s an ordinary human error.

    ‘‘I was obviously hurt, when I was later falsely accused publicly of wrongdoing. I didn’t do anything wrong and to have false allegations in the media was distressing.’’

    What the lawyers would not allow to be reported was the fact that Gillard shared a home in Fitzroy bought by Wilson using the embezzled funds. There is or was no suggestion Gillard knew about the origin of the money. We now await the issue to which Bolt refers.

    If it comes, and if it is powerful as Bolt suggests, it will be further evidence that the Victorian Right represented by the AWU is involved in a life and death struggle with the Right as represented by the Hospital Services Union. Thomson was a senior official of the HSU for 20 years before entering parliament via the seat of Dobell.

    The HSU split several years ago into two factions. Thomson was supported by Jeff Jackson, Kathy Jackson’s former husband. This so-called old guard was the support base for Victorian right-wing power boss, David Feeney. Feeney is now looking for a parliamentary seat because Gillard’s abysmal numbers have made his third Senate spot vulnerable.

    A defeat for the old guard by way of a successful prosecution of Thomson by police, would leave Feeney powerless and without a base or a seat.

    Jackson himself has been accused of using union money on escorts with enemies of the Victorian HSU boss releasing bank statements showing payments to the same Sydney brothel where federal MP Thomson’s credit card was allegedly used. Jackson has denied the claims. Ultimately at issue here could be the succession to Gillard, and I’ll explain why.

    When Kathy Jackson called in the wallopers, the stakes were high. Because a federal defeat for Thomson and his allies would enhance the power base of Victoria’s two other factional king makers, Bill Shorten and Stephen Conroy who are both aligned with the new guard in the HSU. And we all know what Shorten’s ultimate ambition is.

    What a tangled web we weave especially when you consider Thomson is married to Zoe Arnold, a former Transport Workers Union official and adviser to former NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher. Alex Williamson, daughter of HSU national president Mike Williamson, is an adviser to Gillard. And, of course, as mentioned, Kathy Jackson, who blew the whistle on Thomson, was married to former Victorian state HSU secretary Jeff Jackson.

    Truly the NSW Disease has arrived in Canberra.

    Meanwhile amid all this interbred internecine manoeuvring Gillard attempts to adopt the high ground, attacking shadow attorney-general George Brandis for intervening in the course of justice. On Thursday morning Gillard attacked Brandis for speaking to NSW Police Minister Michael Gallacher at a time when the allegations against Thomson were being assessed by NSW Police. Unfortunately she got her facts wrong because the NSW police only announced they were conducting an assessment four days after Brandis spoke to Gallacher and in fact only got Brandis’s dossier three days after he spoke to Gallacher.

    A small point but one that indicates the pressure is beginning to show on Gillard as she desperately searches for points of deflection. During the same press conference she also vainly tried to defend Thomson’s decision not to make a statement to the parliament on the facts. We all know why; if he lies he’s finished as an MP and Gillard is washed up as Prime Minister. Gillard and Thomson are shackled together just as surely as two First Fleet convicts.

    Oh, and here’s a small postscript on which to end. On September 7 at the Wyong Christian School at 2pm there will be the opening of a new hall built with funds from Gillard’s time overseeing the Building the Education Revolution. Thomson is scheduled to attend as the local member. My gut instinct is that both he and the Prime Minister will be otherwise engaged. ”

    What set her off like a vuvuzela strapped to a mallard (Carpe ™ )? The bit about her shacking up with Wilson?

  99. Podsnap

    What set her off like a vuvuzela strapped to a mallard (Carpe ™ )? The bit about her shacking up with Wilson?

    The truth ?

  100. Podsnap

    The more I look at your comments Monty the more amazed I am at your shameless gall –

    Stuff like this -

    He accuses Insiders of dropping Milne because of its left-wing bias. But why did News drop him as well? Is it due to their left-wing bias?

    They got leaned on muggins. Do you deny they did ? How on earth do you square that with your principles ?

    But of course you say the whole disgusting farrago isn’t a story right ?

    But then using your own irrefutable logic – it must be a story because at the end (the very, very end) Fairfax finally covered it. Did they cover it due to their right wing bias ?

  101. JC

    WTF are you actually on about, monty?

    Monst, I’ll ask again. If I pay for you to have a bungee jump will you do it, as I want to see if the chord breaks. I’m wanting to satisfy a scientific question I have.

  102. Steve of Glasshouse

    Jc wrote7.43 pm
    “Monst, I’ll ask again. If I pay for you to have a bungee jump will you do it, as I want to see if the chord breaks. I’m wanting to satisfy a scientific question I have.”

    Is that the theory where the cord is longer than the vertical drop?
    Will the cord snap? I like that theory..

  103. JC

    Of course the cord has to be the right correct size. I want to see if fat boy breaks the regulation bungee cord.

    The science isn’t settled on this one.

  104. johno

    Check out the response to Mark Scott’s articles in The Oz today.

    Over 200 responses and as far as I can tell, pretty much all of them are negative.

    One of the biggest responses to an article that I have seen, and all one way traffic.

    I wonder if Abbott abd his Communications Minister can read the politics behind this?

  105. Rabz

    This is the article by Milne that had gillard ring the Australian several times, screeching and threatening them. The Australian apologised and removed the article.

    Ahem – please see my comment at 9:04am this morning…

  106. Rabz

    Seems there are too many parties making allegations (or “alligators” as they is known) of late for lardarse to ring up and screech at them all.

    She’d be permanently hoarse, and the Australian public wouldn’t want that…

  107. Cold-Hands

    Gab, given what has been revealed since, the article that led to Gillard’s tirade seems pretty small beer. The point that enabled her to go ballistric- that Gillard shared a home in Fitzroy bought by Wilson using the embezzled funds is still debatable (as technically her Abbotsford home remained her legal place of residence throughout the affair), but everything else has been confirmed by documents or witnesses subsequently revealed. I think that she realized that Milne’s piece was just the tip of the iceberg and wanted to scotch further exploration. Ironically, by forcing Michael Smith out of broadcasting and turning him into a full time investigator, she enabled him to ferret out documents, witnesses and statements that have led her to stonewall for fear of misleading Parliament and will go far in seeing her further discredited or imprisoned.

  108. .

    Hi batshit Bob from whale beach.

    The Ausrralian today tossed Brough overboard. Dead meat.

    Even Niki Savva was being even handed towards Abbott and Gillard.

    Things are looking ominous.

    Ooh yes. Labout with 40 or less seats would be ominous for you.

  109. JC

    Bob’s back as Norman? Norm? Fme. How low can he go?

    Bob, the chipmunk is paying to write speaches, not act like a lunatic on a right/Libertarian blog, you asshat.

    Go away and write some fucking speeches for the idiot.

  110. Norman

    Brough couldn’t even front a news conference to explain himself. A three sentence statement from afar was all he was up to. Piss weak for an ex soldier.

    Grow some balls, Mal.

  111. JC

    Bob

    He’s going to win the seat. You know that, right?

    Grow some balls? Lol.

  112. .

    It’s Mal Brough’s fault now is it that Slipper turned out to be a fuckwit, is it? Did he tell him to wear all of the regalia, did he?

  113. Steve of Glasshouse

    As a voter in Peter Slipper’s electorate ( and having met both Peter Slipper and Mal Brough and a couple of the texters ), Mal will win the seat at the next election.

  114. Tintarella di Luna

    Mal will win the seat at the next election

    You are a lucky man Steve – on the other hand I have the displeasure of being represented by someone who’s distinguished himself in the House of the People by complaining on behalf of his wife, who is a very lovely lady, that the beef stroganoff servings in the subsidised dining room, were too small. Lucky-not.

  115. .

    I’m not sure if the ALP will hold Reid.

    Unlikely, but if Abbot gets to 58.1% 2PP, it may have a margin of zero votes…

    Abbot has been over 60% 2PP before.

  116. .

    Just noticed Shane Wand will probably lose his seat at the next election. Good times, good times.

Comments are closed.