ABC AN ALP SHELTERED WORKSHOP
... that pays above award wages
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
It was time to reach for my depleted bottle of Mylanta again last night in an attempt to endure another Monday night of ABC television... the bottle is now empty, and I’m still angry. There must be an answer to this outrageous government-financed monolith that disregards with haughty contempt the majority of the taxpaying public.
The British Government's potential plans for the BBC have already caused Hollywood stars and TV presenters to come out in defence of the institution, as is always the case. But the defence of the cosseted "Friends the ABC" is shallow and weak with PM Turnbull number one ticket-holder.
From 10 shillings in the UK in 1922, to a colour TV licence that now costs £145, (a black and white set costs £49). There is a maximum fine of £1,000 for not paying it.
The BBC is itself responsible for the collection of licence fees but it is not all that dedicated to the job because only wealthy BBC devotees seem prepared to pay, with very few fines ever collected.
“Decriminalisation” is currently being considered by the Tories and it would lose the BBC an estimated £200m a year but it’s claimed poor people would no longer need to worry about a knock on the door that Australians used to have to worry about.
In 2014, this still gave the BBC a comfortable £4.7bn to spend... on top of another £1.3bn of commercial and other incomes. Australian taxpayers fork out $1.2bn every year via the Government for some very one-sided programming like Q&A that attracts huge criticism.
This criticism is largely ignored by the ABC as it fosters its “Friends of the ABC” group to assuage its hurt feelings. The ABC, with little account for its actions, has become a very inward looking organisation taking no notice of accusations of bias toward Labor governments.
The BBC and the ABC get many extra dollars from the sale of its programs and their retail shops, licensing etc. These substanive amounts are not deducted from the yearly grants.
Australia used to have a system similar to the BBC. The ABC was largely funded by television licences up until 1974 when the Whitlam government (who would have guessed) abolished the licence system leaving the ABC exposed to the whims of government funding and under conservative political pressure ever since.
Hmmm, Whitlam was well aware of the way the ABC would lean when dependent on a government handout.
Left media in the UK say, “...sure BBC bias is there, but only because the Tories have ‘spooked’ it”, suggesting reform is long overdue. Well I’m not sure how that can possibly assist the BBC’s cause, but it is symptomatic of the woolly thinking of public broadcasters, including our own ABC.
A long-awaited White Paper, that could be published this month, will allow the Tories’ Left to set out a tough new regime as part of a proposed deal to grant a new Royal Charter to safeguard the BBC “service” for another 11 years but, like our ABC, the institution will continue to crumble.
The White Paper will insist the suspected highly-paid salaries of BBC executives be disclosed for public scrutiny. Australia already knows (albeit by accident) the outrageous money the ABC pays its presenters and producers. Half of its budget is taken up on salaries private sector staff could only dream of and could never be justified.
For instance a program like the 12 minute per week “Media Watch”, with a staff of 40 and multiple producers, is free to savage commercial media while only occasionally sniping at the ABC in a weak attempt at neutrality. Presenter Paul Barry (above) is paid $200,000 pa and none of the crew works on a weekend meaning critical current news is never covered.
A silly little sexually confused radio broadcaster by the name of Fran Kelly, who was sacked by the commercial media, is now paid an astounding $250,000 pa. Something will need to give soon.
Both the BBC and the ABC are crumbling because government media can, by its nature, only ever service the Left at the expense of the Right.
Radicalism and Marxist philosophy will not succeed in commercial television so the only place remaining where it can be promoted is a government station. So, in a few generations, multiple promotions of like-minded staff will ensure the entire public broadcaster is choc-a-block with destructive Leftists.
The only time the ABC invites a conservative pannelist to comment is when a rabid screaming Lefty is invited to tear him down.
In a commercial sense the BBC’s charter is hopelessly confusing and deleterious. Its programming is required to rate well against the commercial channels so the BBC’s most popular programs are scheduled up against the commercial channels’ best. How can that work? More importantly why should it even be contemplated?
Host Jeremy Clarkson was sacked and the programs replacement has since been taken off air
Come dancing is one of the BBC's highest rating shows that is thrown at the free to air shows,
Why should the free to air channels (of which there are 60 in the UK) compete to purchase highly rating programs only to be hamstrung by a taxpayer-funded government channel. Yet if the BBC doesn’t compete it is labelled as unpopular and inefficient.
Both the BBC and the ABC are immune from the difficulties facing commercial media due to the digital revolution.
Abbott started to move toward ABC reform but that was reversed with the Turnbull coup. The ABC has since snuggled up to its Left supporters believing its excesses are able to continue unhindered.
If our ABC was thrown to the commercial wolves and asked to compete for revenue on a level playing field it would not last a week. A solution is mooted to be a return to licensing where only the ABC lovers finish up paying for the Left garbage that most of us switch off.
One of the modern problems is that all ruling conservative governments now have a heavy sprinkling of Lefties who adore public broadcasters and wave away criticism of bias with utterings of democratic “independence”.
But “independence” is only valid when the independent is silently agreeing with the bias.
If the ABC was made to collect its own licence fees, only those who believe the ABC was worth paying for would be willing to pay. The ABC could then be allowed to take up commercial advertising.
The free to air stations could then survive on their own wits without being constantly savaged by a government TV network that has no need for prudent spending or economies.
But hang on... why should only the Left have its own TV network? Where is the conservatives’ broadcaster? The truth is that neither faction is entitled to its own network and in fact the ABC without commercial experience could not possibly survive anyway,... and nor should it!
And something must be done about the cost of Mylanta.
[CORRECTION: Posters are correct. The third paragraph should have read as such...."From 10 shillings in the UK in 1922, to a colour TV licence that now costs £145, (a black and white set costs £49). There is a maximum fine of £1,000 for not paying it."]