May 26, 2004
MR 85%
Scroll to page 71 (bottom right corner) of this Hansard pdf file to enjoy a Parliamentary critique of the Sydney Morning Herald’s plastic turkey correspondent -- who doesn’t mention the subject in his column today. Probably saving it for Saturday, when he'll quote the entire thing.
Meanwhile, a conservative ABC boardmember has addressed some Media Watch issues:
Dr Brunton's "essay" raised concerns about Media Watch's report of the Hutton inquiry into the suicide of UK weapons expert David Kelly. He also questioned the program's treatment of columnist Janet Albrechtsen through its coining of the verb "to albrecht" - meaning to lift and twist sources to suit the writer's purposes.
ABC director of television, Sandra Levy, would like to assure everybody that Media Watch did not breach any of the ABC's editorial policies.
Posted by Tim Blair at May 26, 2004 02:36 AMAlan Ramsey after a particularly nerve-wracking day pinching stuff off the World Wide Whatsit.
"ABC director of television, Sandra Levy, would like to assure everybody that Media Watch did not breach any of the ABC's editorial policies."
Which rather suggests that there is a problem with ABC editorial policy doesn't it?
Posted by: Harry Tuttle at May 26, 2004 at 10:41 AMIsn't it more than ironic that the person who runs the ABC's own media monitoring program is so opposed to the ABC's getting itself monitored? Is there a message here?
Michael Danby's devastating critique of Alan Ramsey's journalistic methods is well worth a read--though it's on p. 28819 of the pdf of Hansard.
Wow - the SMH's Moir has a cartoon criticising the UN over Sudan.
Posted by: Andjam at May 26, 2004 at 12:08 PMHow can Media Watch breach Fat Aunty Bollshevik's Collective's editorial policies when Marr's job is to brow beat viewers into the belief socialism is good for you and ABC does such a fantastic job as porpagandist for socialistos.
It would be a non sequitur M.W. is fearless in exposing lying journalists.
It is not a non sequitur to say M.W. breaches ABC's aims.
Posted by: d at May 26, 2004 at 12:40 PMSeems I'm right, Koval is on the board. Policy sets M.W., not just leftoid beliefs.
Posted by: d at May 26, 2004 at 12:46 PMThe ABC's latest in unbiased, dispassionate reporting: Blair parrots Bush on Iraqi 'sovereignty'A quick Google shows that neither Reuters nor the BBC was responsible for the headline, that's all Their ABC's own work.
Posted by: Alan E Brain at May 26, 2004 at 01:00 PMThe ABC's latest in unbiased, dispassionate reporting: Blair parrots Bush on Iraqi 'sovereignty'A quick Google shows that neither Reuters nor the BBC was responsible for the headline, that's all Their ABC's own work.
Posted by: Alan E Brain at May 26, 2004 at 01:00 PMI wrote this to the ABC:
"Why do you use the pejorative word "parrots" in today's headline ("Blair parrots Bush on Iraq")? This is being subjective with what should be purely factual. It's like saying the ABC parrots the New York Times (which is probably more factual than your statement)."
I'm waiting for a response.
I think a response has already happened. The headline now reads "Iraqi government to have full control: Blair".
Posted by: Alan E Brain at May 27, 2004 at 12:32 AMAalan
Thanks. I'ts great to know one may still be able to achieve small changes at the ABC.
Posted by: Freddyboy at May 27, 2004 at 02:08 PM