To be truthful, "sorry" is a word so…

When you think there isn't much to write about in politics, the…

Mangroves: environmental guardians of our coastline

University of South Australia Media Release They are the salt-tolerant shrubs that thrive…

Tuvalu, Climate Change and the Metaverse

When lost to climatic disaster and environmental turbulence, where does a whole…

Nats Vote No OR When You're Standing At…

It's sort of interesting that just a few days ago we had…

Was Amtrak Joe derailed?

By 2353NM Prior to becoming President, Joe Biden was a US Senator for…

Football Capitulates at Qatar

It did not take much. The initial promises of protest from a…

Thanks To Dan Andrews I Got My First…

Just to be clear here, I didn't get it at the polling…

Democracy Tested

The only defence that we, the people, have against an arrogant leader…

«
»
Facebook

The Framing of The ABC, Bill Shorten and Why We’re Being Invaded!

“If you spoke to any Coalition MP – even those appear on it – they’d admit the program does lean to the left.”

Coalition Senator James McGrath

Last night after reading the above quote, I immediately began to ponder what a rough deal Collingwood gets from the umpires week after week – ask any Collingwood supporter and they’ll all admit that umpires do lean toward the other side…

Strangely, most people would quickly realise that the Collingwood supporter may not be the best person to ask if you’re hoping for an unbiased, independent analysis. Something about a conflict of interest.

However, the Coalition seem to have it framed beautifully. If you don’t agree that the ABC is a mob of Trotskyites aiming to bring down our system by giving too much air space to Labor and The Greens – and by too much, we mean, any – then you must be on their side and clearly, you’re not on Team Australia and you’d probably just roll out the red carpet to those asylum seekers.

Last year, I wrote about the way information is framed as being very important. If you run a story about young people hanging around shopping centres harassing other people and follow it with a poll about support for work for the dole, you’ve probably added a few percentage points to the “Yes” vote.

Whenever the Coalition starts to talk about ABC bias, I remember back before the Iraq war, Richard Alston and others argued that it wasn’t presenting a “balanced view”. Among the things that the Liberals found objectionable was an interviewer who had a very “cynical” tone when interviewing someone about the WMDs.

Remember those Weapons of Mass Destruction? For those of you who don’t it went something like this:

Coalition of the Willing: We were attacked on 9/11. Surrender your WMDs.

Iraq: We ain’t got none. You took ’em all after the gulf war.

COTW: We don’t believe you!

Iraq: You can check. Besides it wasn’t us who attacked you.

Weapons inspectors are sent in.

COTW: The inspectors can’t find them because they’re not clever enough to see through you sneaky Iraqis. If you don’t hand over your weapons we’re coming in to get them.

Iraq: I told you before. We ain’t got none.

COTW: This is your last chance! We’re going to count to three! One…

Iraq: What are you? Deaf? Don’t you remember? You took them all away.

COTW: Two… Ok, attack.

Iraq: Hey what happened to three?

COTW: Mission accompllished.

Left wing Media: So where were the weapons?

COTW: Because we had to wait on the UN, they had time to sneak them out the country so we wouldn’t find them.

Left Wing Media: Which is, of course, what you do when you’re about to be attacked. Hide all your weapons!

COTW: Forget the WMDs, the important thing is restoring democracy and freedom in Iraq.

Mm, did anyone else notice how the “mission” in Iraq was re-framed from being about protecting the West from attack to being about removing a dictator and restoring freedom? The WMDs were only a small part of the reason apparently… Hardly worth mentioning, so let’s never do it again.

Anyway, let’s just accept that the ABC has a long history of bias and has cynically criticised the Coalition of the Willing, as well as the current Coalition of the More Than Willing If Only Someone Would Do Something Where We Can Have A War. The ABC has also shown its true colours by running “science” programs which everyone knows is a thinly veiled attack on the Liberal position on science, which is to say that it should be in the hands of people who know how to manipulate it to come up with the evidence which backs the position of the government.

And so we move to Bill Shorten and his conflict of interest. Let’s look at how this is being framed by the media. First, it’s being suggested that he conspired to reach a deal which left members of his union working for below award wages. Ok, let’s just pause a minute here and remember that this was negotiated under the Liberal government that introduced Workchoices which reduced the allowable matters that could be included in awards. The Liberals were all about “flexibility”, so it seems odd to hear the faux outrage from Abbott. Yes, I can see that workers and the Labor movement could think that this is poor form, but the loudest criticism isn’t coming from the left.

But more interesting to me is the way any funds that have been directed to Bill Shorten’s political career are being portrayed.

Now, I know that Shorten isn’t the most popular leader Labor’s ever had, and I know that he seems just a wee bit too ambitious, but let’s just put that to one side to allow me to frame this slightly differently.

The union movement is strongly connected to the Labor Party. Many, many unions divert funds to attempt to help the Labor Party get elected. One union managed to find creative ways to direct funds to help Bill Shorten’s political career.

Yes, I know that it’d be much more ethical to have held dinners and to have charged large sums of money for access, but who’d want to have dinner with Bill Shorten? Maybe Labor could organise something where people paid money not to have dinner with Bill Shorten. For an extra ten dollars, they could not have dinner with Joe Hockey on the same night. Or perhaps if they simply allowed the Mafia to organise the dinner, people could have received an invitation that they couldn’t refuse.

Everything is about framing. That’s why we end up thinking that any money Shorten’s election campaign received is “a conflict of interest”, but any money that the Liberals received from businesses – even family businesses – presents no “conflict of interest”. That’s what’s enabled Abbott to actually present the fact that they’ve shut down information on “operational matters” as a successful stopping of the boats when the simple truth is that, even if boats were arriving, nobody would be allowed to tell us. But even if one accepts that the stopping of the boats is an Abbott government success, one has to wonder how they’ve managed to frame it as though it’s a really, really important thing.

Panic, because we’re being invaded. They’re coming to get us. We need strong borders. Relax a bit, you’ve got a strong government. But not too much, because there are people out there who want to harm you. You know, the ABC and Bill Shorten. I mean, they’re not on our side.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 156 total views,  2 views today

15 comments

Login here Register here
  1. townsvilleblog

    In my humble opinion I think Shorten is a grub, selling out his own members in favor of the companies he did business with, he put the AWU first, the company second and the AWU members last. A heinous act that I have no doubt continues today, Abbott should have had a Royal Commission into the AWU and SDA the two unions who control the ALP via phantom numbers and overturn a members vote of 58.6% on the leadership ballot for Albanese into a win for Shorten, sleazy!

  2. Florence nee Fedup

    One would think money going into Shorten’s pocket. Not into union funds for benefit of workers.

  3. Florence nee Fedup

    Wonder why we are not seeing papers full of comments of how they were ripped off, especially East Link. Witnesses at TURC mainly disgruntled CFMEU officials.

  4. stephentardrew

    Absolutely the problem, of course, is a lack of logical foundational thinking and a sound critique of contradiction. If we can’t get comparative evaluation of statements right then all kinds of nonsense is accepted as fact. It is a bloody frustrating and difficult struggle to be continually battling against a dysfunctional conceptually-opinionated cultural paradigm. Journalist seem incapable of rational analysis accepting all types of contradictory and paradoxical nonsense without a moments thought.

    Sadly propositional logic is a difficult and convoluted subject however without a core of rational logical foundational core statements like non-contradiction, factual-relevance, consistency, coherence, self-consistency, supporting empirical evidence etc. the whole ball game is wide open to endless opinionated abuse. Academics are their own worst enemies drowned in sea of minutia and endless polemic debates when we need a common sense set of axioms that can be applied to statements of opinion.

    In my humble opinion Shorten needs to go he is too compromised and furthermore an openly divisive Machiavellian opportunist.

  5. Harquebus

    It is not possible to say if the ABC is biased as its journalists are hamstrung by policy and political correctness. Only when ABC journalists are able to honestly report on matters will we be able to decide on bias.

  6. oldfart

    he was called unreliable, by the commissioner because he gave to much detail. he was advised to keep his answers to “yes”, “no” or “I don’t know” The commissioner felt that his answers were to long. That’s the context of his being reliable or unreliable.

  7. oldfart

    speaking of operational matters, I wonder what the border protection force are going to do when confronted by boatloads of stranded holiday makers trying to escape Bali and wanting to reach Australia. Disgruntled Aussies can be pretty savage

  8. kerri

    I could only tolerate a small part of The Royal Commission, but for the small parts of evidence I saw it was abundantly clear that Shorten was, and still is, passionate about understanding workplace agreements! Personally I want Shorten gone because he is way too Christian and right wing and is just a Tony Abbott mini me on way too many issues. But that is just opinion. Shorten’s entering politics appears to have robbed both business and unions of a skilled and interested negotiator. His capacity to recall the details of many agreements in the terms of the workplace issues impressed me. He clearly was not in the job just for the money. As for Dyson Heydon wanting a “yes” “no” answer, this is lazy jurisprudence. The issues of how deals are negotiated need to be understood from both sides. It’s a complex negotiation as work conditions, remuneration, entitlements etc are traded to the betterment of both sides and I applaud Shorten for achieving some great outcomes.
    Ask yourself this?
    How does Shorten’s mediation for the AWU compare to Abbott’s behaviour at that concrete plant??

  9. Jeff

    Look, if Mr Shorten goes, then the government would have to set up another RC to investigate the new LABOR leader. With Shorten staying, it will save us $80 million. Maybe we could invest those $ in SA. Oh look – flying pigs.

  10. jim

    And 30,000 migrants arrive on a greek tourist island (is it Lesbos) in one day But hardly nothing in the MSM.

  11. Peter F

    “he was advised to keep his answers to “yes”, “no” or “I don’t know” The commissioner felt that his answers were to long.” Obviously raised on three word slogans.

  12. Blinkyewok

    Bill Shorten gave too many facts for the commissioner to cope with. 3 word slogans were probably a requirement of an Abbott Royal witch hunt.

  13. Harquebus

    Have just heard the Q&A will be transferred to the ABC’s news division where it will be under full editorial control. I expect live broadcasts to end.
    Malcolm Turnbull will not appear next Monday.

  14. Phi

    The RC into Trade Unions is a tawdry and costly political diversion. All it has done thus far is expose the stench of hypocrisy in the LNP – a stench that can be smelt right across the political spectrum and right across the nation.

    Pink Bats RC and the Unions RC come at the cost of justice, hospitals, social welfare, public education, indigenous legal services, women refuges.

    Australia is rotting on the inside and Tony Abbott is the stinking bacteria at the very heart of the rot

  15. Terry2

    Turnbull has tried to salvage some dignity after allowing Abbott to muzzle him on the Q&A issue : Turnbull will appear on 7.30 on Monday to explain why he backed down.

    So, Abbott wins and Turnbull sees his leadership ambitions slip away.

    A wise man once said : “Despotic power is always accompanied by corruption of morality.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: