Tag Archives: Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull

Why not shirtfront Mark Scott

Posted on by
Reply

Not, of course, one of those robust run at someone at full tilt while they’re looking the other way kind of shirtfront, as they do in AFL, but merely the grab ’em by the lapels version as they do in that girl’s game they play in Sydney. [OK, OK – just kidding.] But seriously, if even Leigh Sales thinks it’s juvenile and beneath contempt, why isn’t the government starting to take the idiocies of the national broadcaster seriously. Without the ABC, the ALP wouldn’t win an election for ten years. Here’s the story:

LEIGH Sales, presenter of the ABC’s flagship current affairs program 7.30, has suggested she argued strongly against the program showing a five-minute skit that made fun of Tony Abbott’s effort to “shirt-front” Vladimir Putin over Russia’s role in the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.

In response to tweets about The Australian’s story today in which Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull described the decision to show the skit as “baffling and disappointing”, Sales tweeted: “I can robustly make my case in editorial meetings but ultimately, I have to present what’s commissioned.”

The ABC has defended what it called a “lighthearted” skit that went to air on Tuesday night previewing “the showdown of the century” between Abbott and the Russian president over Russia’s role in backing Russian separatists who downed MH17. Thirty-eight Australians were killed in the crash.

It’s not funny, and just because it’s done by a Liberal Prime Minister doesn’t mean it is automatically wrong.

What about cabinet solidarity?

Posted on by
Reply

Well there’s ABC independence and then there’s cabinet solidarity. From The Age:

Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has strongly defended the ABC’s editorial independence in the face of Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s attack on the national broadcaster, which he says ‘instinctively takes everyone’s side but Australia’s’.

Mr Turnbull defended the Prime Minister’s right to critique the ABC but, in comments that could be interpreted as resistance to Mr Abbott, he said the ABC was rightly accountable to its board of directors, not politicians.

Do I get this right? The Government sets up a media organisation that has been captured by its ultra-left staff and staffing policies and that’s the end of it. This is not Fairfax or News Media whose life and death is dependent on earning an income in the market. This is a government-paid-for media organisation over which the government apparently has no control. Is that the point? Is that what he means? Doesn’t work for me. This works for me, from The Australian:

THE ABC’s $223 million Australia Network Asian broadcasting service is likely to be scrapped in the May budget to save money and end the pursuit of “soft diplomacy” in the region through television.

Federal cabinet has already discussed the option of dropping the ABC’s contract to broadcast Australian news and entertainment in the region, with the Government Solicitor providing advice on the ramifications of stripping the ABC of its 10-year contract.

Cabinet ministers believe the ABC’s coverage of Australia in the region is overly negative and fails to promote the nation as originally intended in the Australia Network’s charter by using the “soft diplomacy” of Australian news and cultural programs.

The ABC is unresponsive to what its market wants, more than half of whom voted for this government which the ABC is viscerally opposed to. No one says that the ABC has to be a government news service but it is also not supposed to outrage more than half the country with its approach to political issues.