"Taxpayers are entitled to ask why the provision of more than $1 billion in annual funding does not buy Australian coverage but an Al-Jazeera feed."
Read the rest HERE.
An eye on ABC NEWS: Keeping the bastards who keep the bastards honest - honest.
Showing posts with label ABC news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ABC news. Show all posts
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Buying some one else's perspective
From the editorial in today's Australian:
"Taxpayers are entitled to ask why the provision of more than $1 billion in annual funding does not buy Australian coverage but an Al-Jazeera feed."
Read the rest HERE.
And I thought SBS was there to provide an international perspective on the news!
"Taxpayers are entitled to ask why the provision of more than $1 billion in annual funding does not buy Australian coverage but an Al-Jazeera feed."
Read the rest HERE.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Behind the times
We opened ABC's Local News portal. The lead item is Black Saturday.
So what's happening in ABC Business? The Global Financial Crisis.
ABC News: Providing a window into yesteryear
Saturday, July 24, 2010
World Today: two versus one
ABC HEADLINE: ABC's World Today program broadcast "Political veterans chew the campaign fat" on Friday 23 July.
ABC REPORTED: The report featured commentary on the election campaign by Former ALP politician Cheryl Kernot, retiring South Australian Liberal Senator Nick Minchin, and retiring ALP member for Fraser and Parliamentary Secretary for Development Assistance Bob McMullan.
Looking at the transcript, we count a total 2227 words spoken by the two Labor party commentators versus 1213 words from the one Liberal party commentator. Program host ELEANOR HALL is credited with 1467 words.
OUTCOME:
Received 10/9/2010
I refer to your email of 24 July 2010 alleging a lack of balance in a discussion broadcast on The World Today the previous day.
The ABC's editorial standards for balance and impartiality focus on the content of programs. Compliance with these standards is not determined by counting the number of contributors who participate, or the number of words uttered by each party.
The relevant editorial standards are found in clauses 3.4 and 3.5 of the ABC's Code of Practice (and their equivalent clauses in the ABC's Editorial Policies):
3.4 Content will be impartial. Editorial judgements will be based on news values. One perspective will not be unduly favoured over others.
3.5 Balance will be sought but may not always be achieved within a single program or publication; it will be achieved as soon as reasonably practicable and in an appropriate manner. It is not essential to give all sides equal time. As far as possible, principal relevant views on matters of importance will be presented.
In response to your email, ABC News has commented: "It is not possible to use a word count to establish whether balance has been achieved in a particular interview or discussion. What one person can say in ten words, it may take another 100 words to say. The news value of those ten words could be ten times more influential on an audience than 100 words. In pre-recorded or packaged interviews, comments are used on the basis of their news value , not their length, and to a certain extent this applies in live interview situations as well but in a live panel discussion there are too many variables to expect that absolute equality of words spoken, or time allotted will be achieved."
Having reviewed the broadcast, I see no basis for concluding that it lacked news value, unduly favoured a particular perspective, or failed to present a range of principal relevant views on matters of importance.
For your reference, the Code of Practice is available here - http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/
Yours sincerely,
Head, Audience and Consumer Affairs
COMMENT:"The ABC has always publicly defined itself as balanced. It does so, because that's what its editorial guidelines demand of reporters and broadcasters. The reality is different. ABC newsrooms get very nervous when the Liberal Party looks a winning chance and they get angry when Liberal governments retain power." Former ABC employee Kevin Naughton quoted in The Australian 24/7/2010
ABC Bias in Election coverage
COMMENT: The Australian newspaper has an interesting article looking at bias in ABC's election coverage...
ABC picks sides while the 'editor-in-chief' watches on
"One of the most vocal critics of the ABC is a former staff member, Kevin Naughton, who worked at the ABC for 16 years, covering 10 state and federal elections. Naughton, who was media adviser to former SA Liberal leader Martin Hamilton-Smith, told The Weekend Australian yesterday: "The ABC has always publicly defined itself as balanced. It does so, because that's what its editorial guidelines demand of reporters and broadcasters.
ABC picks sides while the 'editor-in-chief' watches on
"One of the most vocal critics of the ABC is a former staff member, Kevin Naughton, who worked at the ABC for 16 years, covering 10 state and federal elections. Naughton, who was media adviser to former SA Liberal leader Martin Hamilton-Smith, told The Weekend Australian yesterday: "The ABC has always publicly defined itself as balanced. It does so, because that's what its editorial guidelines demand of reporters and broadcasters.
"The reality is different. ABC newsrooms get very nervous when the Liberal Party looks a winning chance and they get angry when Liberal governments retain power.
"One classic example was the clarion call of 1996 when a flustered senior current affairs producer exhorted the troops to get stuck into the Libs because, 'we could lose this thing . . . Keating could lose'.
"Programs such as The 7.30 Report are built on a Labor culture of ALP for the workers (including struggling journos), and Kerry O'Brien didn't disappoint when he gave honeymooning PM Julia Gillard a nice run on Monday night."
The Australian's editorial is scathing of ABC New's performance...Less opinion and more news needed at the ABC
"IN his determination to dominate the news media, ABC managing director Mark Scott has missed the only point that matters. It's the quality and not quantity of content that matters."
"Mr Scott allows his senior news-gatherers to use the organisation as a bully pulpit for their own opinions."
"While this newspaper has called all parties to account in the first week of the campaign, it is as if some in the ABC are asking ALP national secretary Karl Bitar to brief them on what questions to ask."
"Deborah Cameron's morning program in Sydney combines a suspicion of business with advocacy of deep-green lifestyles."
"We also pay the ABC to break news, and lots of it, but the corporation recycles stories across its services."
"And while The 7.30 Report used to set the agenda for the next morning's news, its MO today is for O'Brien to tell us what he thinks. More often than not, his main interview is with another ABC journalist."
"He must extract productivity improvements from staff so there is more original news content."
"Mr Scott allows his senior news-gatherers to use the organisation as a bully pulpit for their own opinions."
"While this newspaper has called all parties to account in the first week of the campaign, it is as if some in the ABC are asking ALP national secretary Karl Bitar to brief them on what questions to ask."
"Deborah Cameron's morning program in Sydney combines a suspicion of business with advocacy of deep-green lifestyles."
"We also pay the ABC to break news, and lots of it, but the corporation recycles stories across its services."
"And while The 7.30 Report used to set the agenda for the next morning's news, its MO today is for O'Brien to tell us what he thinks. More often than not, his main interview is with another ABC journalist."
"He must extract productivity improvements from staff so there is more original news content."
As we revealed in our Productivity survey, the productivity of ABC News has plummeted over the last 2 years. Time for a clean flush.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
ABC News fails to deliver
COMMENT: The Australian's Janet Albrechtsen, a former ABC board member, pans ABC News' failures in covering recent events in Canberra in an opinion piece in today's Australian newspaper.
ABC News Watch have demonstrated ABC are doing less with more with their news division (just look at the graph on the right for the declining coverage). How they propose operating a 24 Hour news service that only runs from 9 to 5 is beyond us.
From The Australian...
ABC News Watch have demonstrated ABC are doing less with more with their news division (just look at the graph on the right for the declining coverage). How they propose operating a 24 Hour news service that only runs from 9 to 5 is beyond us.
From The Australian...
Sky shames the ABC
AN agile commercial operator showed how it should be done.
The question is whether the ABC will look at its failings or focus only on its successes.
As a former director, I found it endlessly frustrating to hit the wall of ABC suspicion where legitimate, thoughtful criticism is invariably waved away as the ravings of ideological opponents. Yet, the ABC will grow stronger by responding to criticism that is aimed at making it better. It will cement its legitimacy if it can spot its own flaws rather than wait for others to point them out.
After Wednesday, is the ABC asking itself whether it has the energy and team spirit that kicks in so readily at its poor cable cousin at Sky? Does it understand the urgency of 24-hour news, where mistakes will be made and quickly corrected? Or will the monolithic ABC, even with a 24-hour news channel, fall victim to its culture of bureaucratic paralysis and infighting between fiefdoms?
Last weekend on SBS, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy was asked what he did on Wednesday night. He recalled "getting all these phone calls from journalists asking 'What's happening? What are you doing?'." He replied: "Well, I'm sitting in my office all alone watching Sky News like you are." What a disgrace that the federal minister who funds the ABC could not get the story from our national broadcaster. for the complete article click HERE
Note also comments in The Australian's editorial...
"The ABC's flat-footedness on the biggest news night of the year provides little confidence that it is ready to use its forthcoming 24-hour news channel to break news. What the public does not need are more programs in which ABC journalists interview other ABC journalists or recycle stories from good programs such as Foreign Correspondent. Even Aunty's flagship current affairs radio program AM began yesterday by regurgitating the comments of politicians Bill Shorten, Barnaby Joyce and actress Magda Szubanski from Q and A 12 hours earlier. Nor do Australians need any more spurious analysis such as that of Barrie Cassidy and Fran Kelly on Insiders in February, claiming erroneously that Dennis Shanahan's interpretation of Newspoll results was unfair to Mr Rudd. It begs the question why the ABC should be allowed to take on another taxpayer-funded channel when the corporation plainly cannot manage the ones it already has."
Note also comments in The Australian's editorial...
"The ABC's flat-footedness on the biggest news night of the year provides little confidence that it is ready to use its forthcoming 24-hour news channel to break news. What the public does not need are more programs in which ABC journalists interview other ABC journalists or recycle stories from good programs such as Foreign Correspondent. Even Aunty's flagship current affairs radio program AM began yesterday by regurgitating the comments of politicians Bill Shorten, Barnaby Joyce and actress Magda Szubanski from Q and A 12 hours earlier. Nor do Australians need any more spurious analysis such as that of Barrie Cassidy and Fran Kelly on Insiders in February, claiming erroneously that Dennis Shanahan's interpretation of Newspoll results was unfair to Mr Rudd. It begs the question why the ABC should be allowed to take on another taxpayer-funded channel when the corporation plainly cannot manage the ones it already has."
Monday, June 28, 2010
ABC NEWS productivity at record low
With less than 3 days to go till the end of the month ABC News productivity has fallen to a record low dipping below 2009 levels. We'll be examining the fall out in a series of special posts once the final figures are in. With figures like these it's hard to hide the decline.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Un-skeptical reporting on climate change from Auntie-update
Based on this story ARCTIC MELT TO COST TRILLIONS: REPORT ABC appear to be continuing their pattern of un-skeptical, uncritical reporting on climate change. This article was sourced directly from Reuters (see here), with very little change. There also appears to be have been little change from the source press release available here from the PEW Environment Group. It is difficult to see if any critical investigation or questioning went into these claims.
We deserve more from ABC news than re-issuing press releases from any organisation.
The press release, the full 27 page report and its 12 page summary available available from Pew Environment Group for your scrutiny here; it seems it got very little from Auntie.
Odd that the PEW summary report is nearly as long as the full report...something smells funny, but not to Auntie. Here are a few questions for the dear old girl.
1. Why does this report, by an obviously biased organisation, constitute news?
2. Did the ABC attempt to investigate the veracity of the report? If so, how?
3. It seems the report is based mainly on the PEW Environment Group's Press Release. Does the ABC now just publish press releases from organisations without additional investigation? Is this a sign that the ABC's editorial staff are under pressure following the announcement that ABC will host a 24 hour news service?
4. Why wasn't the release of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change report covered in the same manner? (http://www.climatechangereconsidered.org/). I can find no mention of the NIPCC in ABC NEWS.
5.Is the apparent differential treatment provided by the ABC to organisations promoting climate disaster a sign of biased news coverage on the part of the ABC?
6. If so, how does the ABC propose to re-dress this in-balance?
These questions have been put to ABC audience and consumer affairs. An update will appear when a response is received.
Update 8/2/2010 From ABC Editorial Policy
5.6 Use of secondary sources
5.6.1 Where secondary sources such as media releases or other media reports are used to either generate ideas or gather information, the information drawn from those sources must be cross-checked and verified before use.
ABC reply received 2 March 2010
ABC reply received 2 March 2010
Thank you for your email regarding the ABC News online report Arctic melt to cost trillions: report.
Your concerns have been investigated by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of program making areas within the ABC. We have reviewed the broadcast, assessed it against the ABC’s editorial standards and sought and considered material provided by ABC News.
The ABC Editorial Policies are available at the attached link; http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/
Section 5.2.2(d) of the ABC Editorial Policies states that editorial judgements are based on news values. What is or is not considered newsworthy is a decision made by ABC News editorial managers, based on their considerable editorial experience. Audience and Consumer Affairs is satisfied that the findings of the research are newsworthy and notes the findings received broad coverage across a range of news media.
This news story was written by the Reuters news agency, which attributed the claims in the report and featured the comments of one of the co-authors. The ABC does not possesses the skills to determine the scientific veracity of the claims made in the study. Audience and Consumer Affairs is satisfied that the PEW organisation is credible, that the research was reviewed by a range of economists and scientists and that the decision to report on the research was based on news values.
Audience and Consumer Affairs acknowledges the noteworthy findings of the research appear in both the press release and the news story. Audience and Consumer Affairs cannot agree that the story is a direct lift from that press release. Audience and Consumer Affairs believe the story accurately conveys of the findings of the research and is in keeping with section 5.2.2(c) of the ABC Editorial Policies.
I am advised by ABC News management that ABC News editorial staff are not under any increased pressure following the announcement that the ABC will host a 24 hour news service.
I am advised by ABC News management that it did not cover the release of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change’s report, based on news values. As advised above, what is or is not considered newsworthy is a decision made by ABC News editorial managers, based on their considerable editorial experience.
ABC News advise that it is unaware of any reference to a recent report published by NIPCC.
ABC NEWS WATCH rasied a number of question regarding what pases for news on the ABC in this post in early February an article
ABC News online provides comprehensive coverage of climate related issues, from a broad range of perspectives over time. Audience and Consumer Affairs does not believe that reports relating to “climate catastrophe” are unduly favoured and notes the following recent reports critical of certain pro-climate change perspectives:
Push to change embattled climate panel: http://www.abc.net.au/news/
Climate body ‘embarrassed’ over forest claim: http://www.abc.net.au/news/
UN admits Himalaya glacier data dodgy: http://www.abc.net.au/news/
Scientist denies UN glacier melt date: http://www.abc.net.au/news/
UN climate claims ‘based on student essay’: http://www.abc.net.au/news/
Please be assured that your comments have been brought to the attention of ABC news management.
Yours sincerely
Audience and Consumer Affairs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)