🚀 go-pugleaf

G'day Ian,

>>1. merge or eliminate one or more of the orchestras
>
>Get rid of numerous jobs, and take away many peoples' chance to see live 
>orchestral music. Stop income from royalties of these orchestras and the 
>production of many acclaimed CDs.

So be it.  I don't recall a guarantee of life-time job security for
each musician once he or she joins an ABC orchestra.  Regarding the
royalties, somehow I doubt that the royalties exceed (or even equal)
the cost of the orchestras.
 
>The reason for both National and regional radio is because people have both 
>national and regional interests.

It's not clear to me why exclusive networks are necessary.  After all,
ABC television appears to have both local and national information on
the same broadcasting channel.  Why is radio different?

>>3. put drama production out to contract (particularly because the
>>   ABC dramas have been so poorly received in recent years)
>
>That depends what you call poorly received. 

Low ratings.  Bad reviews.  That sort of thing.  If my memory is
accurate, I understand that Melbourne's audience for Mercury was so
small in some weeks that it barely registered enough viewers to avoid
an asterisk.

>>I'll name four progressive (IMHO) radio presenters who are broadcast
>>here in Melbourne.  Would you mind identifying five of their
>>conservative counterparts?  (I would assume that you'd support balance
>>between progressive and conservative presentation.)
>
>Not if the population of Australia is not in that balance no.
>
>>1. Phillip Adams (RN)
>>2. Terry Laidler (3LO)
>>3. Geraldine Doogue (RN)
>>4. Jon Faine (3LO)
>
>All left wing pogressives, hey. :-)

C'mon, Ian, you can do better than that.  Surely your position is
strong enough that you can actually contribute to this discussion
instead of being so mindlessly negative.

As a first step, why don't you name four conservative ABC radio
presenters?  Or, to make it easier, why not name four presenters who
have open Liberal allegiance (e.g., as Phillip Adams openly proclaims
his allegiance to the Labour party)?

>>You can't have it both ways, Ian.  It's difficult to support a claim
>>that the ABC is unbiased if so many high-profile presenters were so
>>closely aligned with one political party.
>
>Places of education tend to be more left wing. Does that tell you something ?

Sure.  People who have not yet earned their university degrees are
younger and lack the experience of working in private industry.  Once
they step outside the sheltered world of the Ivory Tower and begin to
earn a living, they begin to appreciate the principles which are the
foundation of conservative politics.

>>>In my opinion, good journalists have to be informed people, informed people 
>>>are not conservative. Quid Pro Quo.

>>Just to be sure that I understand what you're trying to say, what do
>>you think "quid pro quo" means?
>
>One thing in return for another.

Oh good, that's my understanding as well.  So I can understand your
train of thought, would you mind explaining how "quid pro quo" relates
to the previous sentence?

>>Why not?  Aren't ABC staffers capable of understanding them?  Or is
>>the ABC not -their- ABC?
>
>No, I do not think the ABC is there to reflect the views of men who need to 
>flash their genetalia, nor do I think the ABC is there to reflect the opinions 
>of those tho do Nazi imperonations of the PM. Call me conservative if you 
>like. :-)

Hmmm.  During the first big rally against the Kennett cuts to public
funding, I recall quite a few people at the front of the crowd giving
Kennett the Nazi salute.  And I recall that a Hitler mustache was
painted on his picture on a poster near the airport.  Both episodes
received considerable coverage on the ABC.  What's the difference?

>>Ian, I understand that they received $540,000,000 last year.  How much
>>more money do they need to receive in order to avoid compromising
>>their integrity?
>
>However much it takes so that they do not rely on any commercial sources.

If $540,000,000 isn't enough money for the ABC to retain its
integrity, I struggle to think of how much money -is- enough.  A
billion?  Two billion?  The mind boggles.

>I am prepared to put up with a bit of waste, because I believe there are more 
>important issues here. You do not seem to be prepared to tollerate any waste 
>at all.

I believe that any organisation which spends $540,000,000 each year
can find some ways to reduce expenditure with minimal impact on
production.  In this time of financial hardship, the ABC should
identify and stop unnecessary spending, so that the money can be
directed to more deserving programs.

>Personally, I like to let the oil drip from the cogs, rather than wear the 
>cogs down, because they are dry, because the machine is more valuable than a 
>bit of wasted oil.

A bit?  I imagine a geyser of oil in the production room.  Too much
oil merely clogs the gears of the machine, preventing it from
responding to a new directions.

>You are entitiled to post what you like, and I have made no request for you to 
>do otherwise. To expect me to answer you in all seriousness, when it comes 
>to commercial interests and media, is a tall order, when you fail to 
>understand basic princilples.

It occurs to me that you may not spend much time with people who
disagree with your basic principles.  In an earlier message, you
appeared to praise a journalist's ability to question.  However, it
also appears that you find it difficult to respond to the questions of
others when they are addressed to you.

>The ABC is essential to Australian democracy because it expresses opinion that 
>is not controlled by big business, or politicians in power. If you take the 
>ABC away, then you have a whole host of corporate voices, not private ones.

This may be our fundamental disagreement on this subject.  I do not
agree with your assumption that the ABC is not beholden to its funding
body, which is the government in this case.  The correlation of a
collective progressive ABC culture and a Labor government is simply
too great to be accepted.

Therefore, I don't believe that the premise that the ABC is not
controlled by politicians in power is valid, which tends to invalidate
the reason for refusing sponsorship from private industry.

Doug

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away 

douglas.buckser@acslink.aone.net.au