fly_tornado Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 we are paying for it. Rupert repatriated $4.5B back to his native USA tax free 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 darren m8 if the gov wants better reviews it could try and be a better government, its a simple formula. the deficit is blown out from $10B to $48B My name's not Darren 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 So what?The Australian has an editorial and opinion column team so far to the right that it makes former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney look like a left wing dope smoking hippie. They (and most other News Ltd papers) may as well set up their offices in the LNP headquarters and be done with the charade that they "just report the news". No-one seems to complain about that. I don't read the newspapers. Only the local community newspaper once per week. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 My name's not Darren Shirley, I can't be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Shirley, I can't be wrong My name is Daryl not Darren 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 oh i prefer to spell darel like daren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 When a paper or TV network lives by commercial advertising, it 's opinions aren't tailored to THAT group GG? The Piper Pays the tune.. The Murdoch papers won't take PAID ads if they don't like them from some organisations HE doesn't like. FREE press ? you're kidding The ABC isn't the old PRAVDA. ( A propaganda arm of government) It never was. People funded would make it responsible to the people . ALL of them not just the Rich opinion makers. IT attacks the government, more fearlessly generally. (Well it used to). The Howard installed boss can never please the RWNJ's. Abbot HAS attempted to directly influence the ABC when it criticised "on water" incidents . THAT should worry all thinking people. . Nev 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Saw a great bumper sticker the other day: " Are those facts, or is your News Ltd?" 3 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 :ban me please:I once questioned the use of peculiar and very poor English language on the ABC and was told that they liked "the venacular"?!???????? wtf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 The ABC and SBS are not liked by Murdoch so I guess we should get rid of them EH! What more proof do you need? The great controller has spoken. They do a great job on emergency situations Have no ads and don't treat you like a cretin/bogan clone. ABC isn't a patch on what it was though. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted April 29, 2015 Author Share Posted April 29, 2015 When a paper or TV network lives by commercial advertising, it 's opinions aren't tailored to THAT group GG? Sure they are biased. You and I and everyone else is also. I despise all media in about equal quantities and won't even shake the hand of a journalist ( a profession I consider to have gotten these days to be lower than prostitution or drug dealing). It's been many years since I spent a cent on them - except ABC. And that is the big difference. I am forced to fund their biased greeny anti-Australian drivel whether I like it or not. They don't even pretend to be balanced, all the major talking heads are hard left by their own admission. Even News Ltd employ some on both sides such as the Communist Adams etc, frankly don't care what freaks they have because it doesn't cost me. News Ltd is a profitable business and pays taxes so in that sense we all benefit. I don't see why those that like to listen to or watch this ABC & SBS stuff can't pay for it all. But yeah, Abbott is too gutless it seems. It should be an option on each tax return "Do you wish to fund the ABC, if so state $ amount". They can then operate on voluntary contributions, everyone happy. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Sure GG and should we be asked where each and every dollar of our taxes gets spent as well? Really?? Why don't we all just collect our own income tax and then spend it on what we see fit? I'm sure that would be fair and equitable. Really???? Do you tithe a proportion your income? Do you get to say what it gets spent on? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Sure they are biased. You and I and everyone else is also. I despise all media in about equal quantities and won't even shake the hand of a journalist ( a profession I consider to have gotten these days to be lower than prostitution or drug dealing).It's been many years since I spent a cent on them - except ABC. And that is the big difference. I am forced to fund their biased greeny anti-Australian drivel whether I like it or not. They don't even pretend to be balanced, all the major talking heads are hard left by their own admission. Even News Ltd employ some on both sides such as the Communist Adams etc, frankly don't care what freaks they have because it doesn't cost me. News Ltd is a profitable business and pays taxes so in that sense we all benefit. I don't see why those that like to listen to or watch this ABC & SBS stuff can't pay for it all. But yeah, Abbott is too gutless it seems. It should be an option on each tax return "Do you wish to fund the ABC, if so state $ amount". They can then operate on voluntary contributions, everyone happy. You suggested "Do you wish to fund the ABC, if so state $ amount" this then leads to all sorts of optional payments "Do you wish to fund the defence forces?, if so state $ amount", "Do you wish to fund the pensions?, if so state $ amount", "Do you wish to fund education?, if so state $ amount", "Do you wish to fund sport?, if so state $ amount", "Do you wish to give tax breaks to farmers?, if so state $ amount". I thought we were trying to cut down on the paperwork in filling out a tax return. It may well be that the ABC is a left wing rat hole from your perspective because you are somewhere over there to the right with the feral commentators who are paid by Murdoch and Gengis Khan. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Sure they are biased. You and I and everyone else is also. I despise all media in about equal quantities and won't even shake the hand of a journalist ( a profession I consider to have gotten these days to be lower than prostitution or drug dealing).It's been many years since I spent a cent on them - except ABC. And that is the big difference. I am forced to fund their biased greeny anti-Australian drivel whether I like it or not. They don't even pretend to be balanced, all the major talking heads are hard left by their own admission. Even News Ltd employ some on both sides such as the Communist Adams etc, frankly don't care what freaks they have because it doesn't cost me. News Ltd is a profitable business and pays taxes so in that sense we all benefit. I don't see why those that like to listen to or watch this ABC & SBS stuff can't pay for it all. But yeah, Abbott is too gutless it seems. It should be an option on each tax return "Do you wish to fund the ABC, if so state $ amount". They can then operate on voluntary contributions, everyone happy. The ABC is at least useful. To use your logic, I am totally p1ssed off that I'm forced to fund $50 billion in submarines. Can I have an option on my tax return to only fund useful Defence projects, and choose which ones? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted April 29, 2015 Author Share Posted April 29, 2015 The most essential requirements from government are national protection plus law and order. Stuff like the ABC are utterly superfluous (not to mention unfairly competing with private tax paying companies, thus a distortion) and therefore should be optional. You can't complain if it is a free choice - those that chose to fund it do so. Just a reminder that very few Australians listen to or watch the ABC so it aught not be a financial burden on all. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 run for parliament GNu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Just a reminder that very few Australians listen to or watch the ABC so it aught not be a financial burden on all. As usual Gnu, you are dead wrong. Percentage of Australians who believe the ABC provides a valuable service to the community: 84%1 Estimated reach of ABC services via radio, television and online: 71%2 Average number of users who visit ABC online each week: 6 million3 ABC Radio’s average five-city weekly metropolitan reach: 4.7 million4 ABC Television’s average five-city weekly metropolitan reach: 9.4 million5 ABC Television’s total weekly regional reach: 4.5 million6 Average national audience for weeknight 7pm News on ABC: 1.2 million7 498,900 active users of the ABC flagship app on average each month8 Average monthly reach of ABC news and current affairs websites: 2.3 million9 References Newspoll, ABC Appreciation Survey, June 2014, national random sample (n=1902) conducted by telephone, people aged 14 years and over. Newspoll, ABC Awareness and Usage Survey, June 2014, in combination with ratings data, people aged 18 years and over. Webtrends Data July 2013—June 2014 Nielsen and Gfk from S1 2014, five city metropolitan, people aged 10 years and over, 2013—2014 OzTAM Consolidated Data 2013—2014 Regional TAM Consolidated Data 2013—2014 OzTAM and Regional TAM Consolidated Data 2013—2014 Flurry Analytics Nielsen Online Ratings – Hybrid, Australia, people aged 2 and over. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Nah, just move to the southern states of the USA, where nearlyeveryone "thinks" like you do. The ABC is credited with many things by reasonable people that are worthy, truthful etc any of which you would never acknowledge with your obvious slanted point of view. To me you sound like a cracked record just reciting Murdoch and IPA propaganda and extreme god bothering stuff. You are one of many in this concocted attack on anyone who isn't a TEA Party candidate potentially. This forum doesn't need divisive political rhetoric of any kind. For a long time I ignored it and suggested it isn't the place but more and more this BS keeps emerging. It's probably one of the reasons people are leaving. Nev 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I'd love to see GNu run for parliament, to "fix" Australia once and for all 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I'd love to see GNu run for parliament, to "fix" Australia once and for all Fred Nile and Sarah Palin's love child. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted April 29, 2015 Author Share Posted April 29, 2015 ^ Freedom of choice doesn't sit well with some non-taxpayers. You like it - you pay for it. Simple. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Stuff like the ABC are utterly superfluous (not to mention unfairly competing with private tax paying companies, thus a distortion) and therefore should be optional. You can't complain if it is a free choice - those that chose to fund it do so. Just a reminder that very few Australians listen to or watch the ABC so it aught not be a financial burden on all. Carp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalph Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 ^ Freedom of choice doesn't sit well with some non-taxpayers. You like it - you pay for it. Simple. You don't like, get up and leave! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 You make your point with many assumptions. An alternative, relying on a profit, means it doesn't happen unless there is a profit in it. (Not for the people but only for the very rich who other wise have too much say). ALL waterfronts and beaches would be privately owned in your brave new world I suppose? " Paying tax for the rich is voluntary" K .Packer Don't talk to me about paying for it. When taxes were much higher than now I paid plenty. The churches pay no tax .Are they part of the NON taxpaying Bunch? Nev 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
octave Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 ^ Freedom of choice doesn't sit well with some non-taxpayers. You like it - you pay for it. Simple. So you shouldn't have to pay for it presumably because you don't watch or listen to it? If you don't watch or listen it, what is your evidence that it is biased? http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/audits-exonerate-abc-over-bias-claims/story-e6frg996-1226852398864 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now