« Topics
1234...595596597598...618619620
Inspector Sands13,760 posts since 25 Aug 2004

The ABC - tax-payer funded by the way - in unashamedly left-wing so it's just balancing it up

Is it actually 'left wing' or is it left wing in the sense that the BBC is accused of being left wing... as in its neutral but it doesn't confirm to your views so it must be the opposite of them?
3
London Lite, Jon and elmarko gave kudos
Mr Q712 posts since 17 Apr 2003
BBC World News

The ABC - tax-payer funded by the way - in unashamedly left-wing so it's just balancing it up

Is it actually 'left wing' or is it left wing in the sense that the BBC is accused of being left wing... as in its neutral but it doesn't confirm to your views so it must be the opposite of them?

Fox is absolutely correct. The ABC is unashamedly left wing. If you define "left wing" journalism as being calm, sober reporting based on facts and evidence. Perhaps a bit of investigative journalism every now and then. Good, solid interviews that hold people (regardless of any party affiliation) to account. It's really quite dull and dreary stuff.

By contrast, Sky News Australia specialises in shouty, talking-heads commentary, packaged up in a eye-wateringly awful format. A combination of shock jocks who are past their prime, or other newcomers trying to make a name for themselves. Oh, and lots of ex-politicians too - just to give them something to do. SNA does have some very good journalists in its ranks, but they're drowned out by the inane remarks of pundits who feel the 17 people watching should be blessed by their "insight" - that is, hot takes based on nothing more than gut feel.
4
Woodpecker, London Lite and 2 others
  • Jon
  • WW Update
gave kudos
London Lite10,563 posts since 4 Jan 2003
London London

By contrast, Sky News Australia specialises in shouty, talking-heads commentary, packaged up in a eye-wateringly awful format. A combination of shock jocks who are past their prime, or other newcomers trying to make a name for themselves. Oh, and lots of ex-politicians too - just to give them something to do. SNA does have some very good journalists in its ranks, but they're drowned out by the inane remarks of pundits who feel the 17 people watching should be blessed by their "insight" - that is, hot takes based on nothing more than gut feel.


Very similar to Fox News where decent journalists such as Shep Smith and Jon Scott are drowned by by a prodomentely opinion led newstalk format which pander to older conservative leaning men, which include hiring presenters and analysts with more than a tenuous connection to the Republican Party.

It's no wonder FNC is the President's favourite source for news.
1
TorontoCommons gave kudos
Woodpecker430 posts since 19 Jan 2018
Central (West) Midlands Today

By contrast, Sky News Australia specialises in shouty, talking-heads commentary, packaged up in a eye-wateringly awful format. A combination of shock jocks who are past their prime, or other newcomers trying to make a name for themselves. Oh, and lots of ex-politicians too - just to give them something to do. SNA does have some very good journalists in its ranks, but they're drowned out by the inane remarks of pundits who feel the 17 people watching should be blessed by their "insight" - that is, hot takes based on nothing more than gut feel.


Very similar to Fox News where decent journalists such as Shep Smith and Jon Scott are drowned by by a prodomentely opinion led newstalk format which pander to older conservative leaning men, which include hiring presenters and analysts with more than a tenuous connection to the Republican Party.

It's no wonder FNC is the President's favourite source for news.


It's worth noting, of course, that Sky News Australia wasn't always like that; for the first fifteen or so years on air, it was a decent (albeit very basic) news channel, with bulletins every half hour and the headlines recapped every fifteen minutes, along with regular simulcasts of Sky News UK, and various newscasts from the US; they also used to produce a New Zealand bulletin for one of the smaller terrestrial channels there.
WW Update4,774 posts since 6 Feb 2007

By contrast, Sky News Australia specialises in shouty, talking-heads commentary, packaged up in a eye-wateringly awful format. A combination of shock jocks who are past their prime, or other newcomers trying to make a name for themselves. Oh, and lots of ex-politicians too - just to give them something to do. SNA does have some very good journalists in its ranks, but they're drowned out by the inane remarks of pundits who feel the 17 people watching should be blessed by their "insight" - that is, hot takes based on nothing more than gut feel.


Very similar to Fox News where decent journalists such as Shep Smith and Jon Scott are drowned by by a prodomentely opinion led newstalk format which pander to older conservative leaning men, which include hiring presenters and analysts with more than a tenuous connection to the Republican Party.

It's no wonder FNC is the President's favourite source for news.


It's worth noting, of course, that Sky News Australia wasn't always like that; for the first fifteen or so years on air, it was a decent (albeit very basic) news channel, with bulletins every half hour and the headlines recapped every fifteen minutes, along with regular simulcasts of Sky News UK, and various newscasts from the US; they also used to produce a New Zealand bulletin for one of the smaller terrestrial channels there.



Indeed. Here's the 1996 premiere of Sky News Australia; the launch video gives some idea of their style at the time:

1
Woodpecker gave kudos
fox1410 posts since 2 Aug 2008

By contrast, Sky News Australia specialises in shouty, talking-heads commentary, packaged up in a eye-wateringly awful format. A combination of shock jocks who are past their prime, or other newcomers trying to make a name for themselves. Oh, and lots of ex-politicians too - just to give them something to do. SNA does have some very good journalists in its ranks, but they're drowned out by the inane remarks of pundits who feel the 17 people watching should be blessed by their "insight" - that is, hot takes based on nothing more than gut feel.


Very similar to Fox News where decent journalists such as Shep Smith and Jon Scott are drowned by by a prodomentely opinion led newstalk format which pander to older conservative leaning men, which include hiring presenters and analysts with more than a tenuous connection to the Republican Party.

It's no wonder FNC is the President's favourite source for news.


It's worth noting, of course, that Sky News Australia wasn't always like that; for the first fifteen or so years on air, it was a decent (albeit very basic) news channel, with bulletins every half hour and the headlines recapped every fifteen minutes, along with regular simulcasts of Sky News UK, and various newscasts from the US; they also used to produce a New Zealand bulletin for one of the smaller terrestrial channels there.

For those “straight news channel” years - described above as a “decent” news channel, their ratings were minuscule. Now, their opinion shows consistently make up make up the Top 5 programs on subscription TV.
Last edited by fox1 on 20 May 2019 9:51pm
https://www.youtube.com/user/centralgalaxy/
WW Update4,774 posts since 6 Feb 2007

Very similar to Fox News where decent journalists such as Shep Smith and Jon Scott are drowned by by a prodomentely opinion led newstalk format which pander to older conservative leaning men, which include hiring presenters and analysts with more than a tenuous connection to the Republican Party.

It's no wonder FNC is the President's favourite source for news.


It's worth noting, of course, that Sky News Australia wasn't always like that; for the first fifteen or so years on air, it was a decent (albeit very basic) news channel, with bulletins every half hour and the headlines recapped every fifteen minutes, along with regular simulcasts of Sky News UK, and various newscasts from the US; they also used to produce a New Zealand bulletin for one of the smaller terrestrial channels there.

This kind of commentary is childish. For those “straight news channel” years - described above as a “decent” news channel, their ratings were minuscule. Now, their opinion shows consistently make up make up the Top 5 programs on subscription TV.


But surely there is a lot to be said for the notion that popularity ≠ quality. After all, Fox News gets consistently decent ratings (for a cable news channel), while the prestigious, award-winning PBS NewsHour seldom makes any waves in terms of ratings. In the UK, Channel 4 News trails well behind both BBC and ITV News, yet it is renowned internationally for the quality of its in-depth journalism.

The same is often true for dailies. After all, The Sun in Britain's most-read newspaper! Wink
1
Jon gave kudos
fox1410 posts since 2 Aug 2008
A lot of people would say Tucker is the only quality news left on television. Wink

I love Channel 4 News... (joke) especially Cathy whatshername! And Jon Snow, I mean I loved the guy as a kid but he’s as left as they cone. To be serious, as a kid in England, I loved C4 News in 1989.
Last edited by fox1 on 20 May 2019 10:19pm - 2 times in total
https://www.youtube.com/user/centralgalaxy/
1
WW Update gave kudos
Woodpecker430 posts since 19 Jan 2018
Central (West) Midlands Today
This kind of commentary is childish. For those “straight news channel” years - described above as a “decent” news channel, their ratings were minuscule. Now, their opinion shows consistently make up make up the Top 5 programs on subscription TV.


Care to explain how my commentary is childish? All I said was that it used to be a decent news channel, and I stand by it. It wasn’t fantastic, by any means - indeed, it was very basic, not to mention repetitive - but I always found it perfectly watchable.

I am well aware of the channel’s sharp increase in ratings since its move towards opinion shows - but popular does not always mean good.
1
WW Update gave kudos