SBS Rapped for smut, porn - and bias (1 Viewer)

[Captain Gh3y]

Off topic, but I'm still yet to be convinced how any of the trash on the commercial stations (not denying it's trash) is somehow 'right wing'.

Like...

"omg someone got evicted from big brother, now I have to vote for John Howard"

or

"lol ACA exposed a bureaucracy fining an old lady, now I have to support the War in Iraq".

Doesn't make sense people.

 

[lexie85]

^exactly, if anything the bb fans hate john howard & co for axeing bb uncut lol

 

[wheredanton]

^exactly, if anything the bb fans hate john howard & co for axeing bb uncut lol

I think you will find that most people who follow BB religiously are teen girl morons and would probably better understand the voting structure of BB than the Australian political system.

Most allegations of bias in relation to the commercial channels relates to their treatment of serious political issues - ie they just gloss over it. Essentially they are more concerned with slipping in subliminal promos for their other shit tastic shows ('Steve Vizard dancing on thin ice with ASIC' - or something like that) than actually critical journalism. Have a look at 60minutes, it looks like entertainment tonight.

 

[HotShot]

Fuck man SBS is only the decent channel. Inspector Rex - kicks ass. ABC is a whole man, srs they put too many pommy shows on.

Ten and 7 - just put the some crappy american shows - OC, Lost, Prison Break etc etc. ..

Ten is good in the sense they still have simpsons.

9 - only good for the sport and now that the Ashes are on.

SBS - 24/7 rocks - there is always something interesting on whether it be porn, soccer, datelines, the world news, the IRON CHEF, inspector rex, some random shows, documentaries.

man its like the best channel Australia has.

 

[frog12986]

Whilst the political analysis on the commercial networks may be a touch thin, the personalities definitely convey their own bias.. Mark Riley, Laurie Oakes, Paul Bongiorno..

Similarly, the ABC through Maxine McKew, Tony Jones, David Marr, and of course Kerry O'Brien, present so called 'critical analysis' based on their own close leanings to either the ALP, or their deep seated hatred of Howard..

Of course every media personality will have their own bias, however when it is a publicly funded entity that is observed by an extremely small minority of the electorate, tolerance should rightly wear thin.

If concern is so rife, then why don't all the likeminded personalites and their followers fund a commercial network that presents views and programmes in tune with their own.. now for some reason that would be rather unsustainable..

 

[withoutaface]

I wouldn't say SBS is leftist, but if it is, it functions as a way of balancing the right wing trash on the commercial channels designed to make us placid and unthinking...so we have two 'left' channels, ABC and SBS, and three 'right' channels, Ten, Prime and Win.

What's the problem?

The problem is that the two left wing channels are government funded, whereas the right wing channels survive because there's a public demand for that kind of a slant. It doesn't matter how right wing other channels get, the ABC and SBS should always do their utmost to remain independent, because:
a) most people only watch one news broadcast. If you're having a left wing news hour to balance out a right wing one you're simply creating twice as many voters who are fed biased garbage, rather than actually performing a service to the community and informing voters of what the issues are in an impartial manner that lets them make up their own mind.
b) if there was a demand for left wing news, it would find its way into a commercial network, and people would watch it. If noone's going to watch such news on a commercial network, what makes the ABC any different? It just ends up transmitting to the homes of a very small percentage of the population and changes sweet fuck all, because people see bias on all networks and get discouraged from watching news altogether.
c) it is taxpayer funded. If taxpayers are paying their hard earned cash for a news program, the least they should expect is that it reports in a manner that helps them understand issues better rather than being brainwashed.

 

[wheredanton]

The ABC news isn't bias. Didnt anyone notice how the whole of their news bulletin last night was dedicated to how the NSW ALP has issues.

b) if there was a demand for left wing news, it would find its way into a commercial network, and people would watch it.

Firstly I don't think the 7pm ABC news bulletin is bias at all. It is generally higher quality journalism compared to the commercial channels.

And what is 'left wing news'. Editorial comment in the news bulletin? The only difference between the channels is that they choose to air more or different stories and possibly in a different order.

Anyways how can you have that much faith in the public to be able to select high quality journalism? The people want dancing with the stars, prison break and dancing on ice. And if they want news they want light news that doesn't make them feel stupid. Pictures help. See 7,0 and 10. ACA Today Tonight and 60 mins.

 

[Bendent]

well at least we asians can rely on satellite tv.

mmm yeh.

 

[dieburndie]

Biased. The ABC isn't Bias-ed.

Also, WAF, one reason commercial networks don't present anything left wing is because it isn't in their best interests to promote ideas which seek to restrict big business. Why would the various media conglomerates want to prevent their own expansion or increase their tax?
It's got nothing to do with a lack of demand for left wing news coverage.
Not that I really think the commercial networks are particularly right wing, they're just stupid.

 

[wheredanton]

If concern is so rife, then why don't all the likeminded personalites and their followers fund a commercial network that presents views and programmes in tune with their own.. now for some reason that would be rather unsustainable..

People would prefer to watch dancing with the stars than listen to informed debate or watch a documentary on the difference in sexual practices of east and west Germany during the cold war ('sex' you say? It must be smut).

Dancing with the stars doesn't make anyone feel stupid or ignorant and it requires zero mental effort or concentration. Shows that don't offend or alienate people and appeal to the lowest common denominator are bound to be market winners. Shows that aim to high and require the viewer to have some knowledge automatically alienate that viewer. And the worst way to alienate people is to indicate to them that they are too dumb to understand. How many people would turn on the 730 report and have no idea what John Howard and Kerry O'Brien are banging on about? Mid term elections? 'lame duck president'? Iraq? What? State minister's crisis meeting? Are they going to understand what Howard is talking about?

How about ACA? The stories run for a non taxing 2 min and you don't have to know ANYTHING to be able to understand. Dodgy builders, fat stories etc.

 

[withoutaface]

Biased. The ABC isn't Bias-ed.

Also, WAF, one reason commercial networks don't present anything left wing is because it isn't in their best interests to promote ideas which seek to restrict big business. Why would the various media conglomerates want to prevent their own expansion or increase their tax?
It's got nothing to do with a lack of demand for left wing news coverage.
Not that I really think the commercial networks are particularly right wing, they're just stupid.

1. Businesses don't always favour economic liberalism (e.g. asking for subsidies, protectionism, etc).
2. If left wing news is in demand, the amount more newspapers/whatever else they'd sell would far outweigh any effect upon media or corporations laws. For example a newspaper would need >50% readership to change that, and by that point they're winning no matter that regulations are put in.

 

[dieburndie]

So you're saying that there is no demand for left wing news?

Edit: Furthermore, I think something like now being able to own another media platform in the same area was a massive incentive for them to promote a Liberal agenda.
If they can get similar ratings/readership with either left or right bias, they're going to choose the right aren't they?

 

[withoutaface]

There is, but it's not that significant. The Australian public are, in general, socially conservative and economically centrist, a view that the majority of news sources reflects.

 

[wheredanton]

So you're saying that there is no demand for left wing news?

There isn't a demand for so called 'left wing news' because it makes people feel stupid and bad about themselves.

People would prefer to watch a story about race day in melbourne or some random dad who won't pay child support than watch SBS reporting that another who knows how many people died in Iraq today (same goes for the Jim Learah news hour on PBS)

 

[frog12986]

People would prefer to watch dancing with the stars than listen to informed debate or watch a documentary on the difference in sexual practices of east and west Germany during the cold war ('sex' you say? It must be smut).

Dancing with the stars doesn't make anyone feel stupid or ignorant and it requires zero mental effort or concentration. Shows that don't offend or alienate people and appeal to the lowest common denominator are bound to be market winners. Shows that aim to high and require the viewer to have some knowledge automatically alienate that viewer. And the worst way to alienate people is to indicate to them that they are too dumb to understand. How many people would turn on the 730 report and have no idea what John Howard and Kerry O'Brien are banging on about? Mid term elections? 'lame duck president'? Iraq? What? State minister's crisis meeting? Are they going to understand what Howard is talking about?

How about ACA? The stories run for a non taxing 2 min and you don't have to know ANYTHING to be able to understand. Dodgy builders, fat stories etc.

I'm not debating that what you said isn't the case, however as you highlight, people would rather watch light entertainment, and take 'time out' from the reality that exists. The fact remains however, that it is these people who pay for the ABC and SBS and, as such, demand television that is not overtly bias or critical, regardless of how 'unfounded' or 'ignorant' that may be..

I must say though, for SBS to refuse to identify Al-Queda as a terrorist organisation is rather weak..and well we all know how much George Fungus is infatuated with Howard and his foreign policies..

The academic world seems to have an unrivalled superiority complex..

 

[wheredanton]

I'm not debating that what you said isn't the case, however as you highlight, people would rather watch light entertainment, and take 'time out' from the reality that exists. The fact remains however, that it is these people who pay for the ABC and SBS and, as such, demand television that is not overtly bias or critical, regardless of how 'unfounded' or 'ignorant' that may be..

So, since the people don't actually want criticism and want lighter options, and they are paying for the ABC perhaps the 730 report can be replaced by Pimp My Ride and the 7pm news bulletin presented by Jennifer Hawkins and be limited to only stories that have footage. Like plane crashes in Brazil, a big gas works explosions in downtown Osaka and Prince Harry's latest blunder.

I still contest the idea that the ABC is clearly bias. I know most of us are not old enough to remember a time when John Howard wasn't PM but aunty has never really been popular with the government of the day.

 

[walrusbear]

yeah i like how criticism or intelligence in media is now 'left wing bias'

or how foreign films are 'porn'

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Hang on...

The ABC isn't being called biased because it presents intelligent current affairs programs, it's being called biased because opinion programs such as Media Watch are dominated by commentators from the left.

The discussion here seems to have got to the idea that the lack of serious current affairs programs on the commercial networks is somehow indicative of bias toward the government, who are in turn trying to also make the current affairs programs on ABC non-serious.

 

[walrusbear]

they are trying to make the ABC shows non-serious

 

[Captain Gh3y]

they are trying to make the ABC shows non-serious

Then why the hell did they just axe glass house?