Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Media Watch - More hypocrisy from the ABC

Kingsley Amis stated “Laziness has become the chief characteristic of journalism, displacing incompetence”. It’s vice-versa at the ABC. 
Media Watch last night put forward the statement: "But many real journalists struggle when reporting science. "
ABC NEWS WATCH agrees. A quick look over our missing news and lack of inquiry pages reveals many examples of important discoveries that have gone missing at the ABC, and others that have been poorly covered, with reporters simply quoting press releases, forgetting the important role of journalists to remain impartial and sceptical. In addition to this, Australian's are missing out on valuable contributions of numerous scientists who are not on the ABC's list of politically correct experts that its activist reporters can rely on to confirm their own world view.
Media Watch should look no further than down the corridor to the ABC' s news room for numerous examples of  "real journalists struggling to report science." Perhaps it's because they too mix activism for journalism. We did part of the job for them back in 2010 looking at ABC's Climate Coverage .
Here's an extract from Part one.
Auntie’s reporters have closed their eyes to the on-going scientific debate raging around them. It does this in a number of ways. 
Firstly the natural inclination of the media, particularly government sponsored news agencies, to favour alarm over calm, results in stories with screeching headlines such asOceans on brink of mass extinction: study, or Climate check-up 'screams world is warming' getting prominence over less sensationalist stories such as Is climate change new (and bad)? ABC looks at the science through its Groupthink looking glass, cherry picking those science stories that can be beaten up to provide the scariest headlines that agree with its reporters alarming world view. The considered restraint of sceptical scientists simply does not attract as much attention, and all too often news of their less sensational findings end up on the copy room floor.
Secondly, certain ABC reporters seem to be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome when it comes to interviewing scientists promoting climate alarm. They appear so besotted they are failing to properly scrutinize experts and authoritative documents like IPCC assessments and government reports. They put their faith in authority without bothering to properly verify the facts, the way journalists did in the good old days. In doing so they act as echo chambers spreading misconceptions and exaggerations in the process.
Thirdly, bias in ABC climate reporting is not so much due to a grand conspiracy of misguided amateurish environmental activists acting as reporters, though it seems many now walk the corridors of ABC’s head office, but stems from ineptitude. As Napoleon Bonaparte suggested “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.”

In regard to last night's report we'll have a new list of questions for Media Watch over the next few days.


  1. Don't let controlled opposition deceivers like Bolt steal either your thunder or your blog readers.

    It's important- his constant stream of posts "borrow freely" from many genuine sites including yours, and in doing so co-opt your efforts and stop more people coming here to get it straight from the source.

  2. It is my contention Media Watch should be pulled or, at least, Holmes replaced. Last night's programme was disgraceful; clearly an agenda-driven smear that, hopefully, will backfire on the ABC and Media Watch host, Jonathan Holmes.

    It had nothing to report other than a vitriolic attempt to discredit a well-known and competent scientist with years of research experience under her belt. Nothing newsworthy at all other than Dr. Marohasy questions the validity of the so-called science supporting the theory of catastrophic anthropological global warming.

    The hypocrisy evident in that show last night was breathtaking. Where is a similar programme exposing the foolishness of Michael Mann (recently interviewed on Lateline)or the well known prediction failures of Tim Flannery? How about the lack of mainstream media coverage of the Gleick affair or the Climategate 2 emails?

    Your post is spot on again. I gave up relying on the ABC to bring me truthful, unbiased and balanced reporting a long time ago.



Please keep to the topic. Abusive comments and bad language are simply not tolerated. Note that your comment may take a little while to appear.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.