Why the ABC, and the public that trusts it, must stand firm against threats to its editorial independence
As the public debate over the ABC rages on, trust and editorial independence will make or break the public broadcaster, argues The University of Melbourne’s Dennis Muller in this crossposting from The Conversation.
The people who are turning up at Save the ABC rallies around the country are defending a cultural institution they value because they trust it.
In particular, they trust its news service. Public opinion polls going back to the 1950s consistently show it is by far the most trusted in the country.
So at this time it is pertinent to look at what creates a trustworthy news service. The cornerstone is editorial independence. As opinion polls have shown time and again, where people suspect a newspaper, radio, TV or online news service of pushing some commercial or political interest, their level of trust falls.
“since 2014 the Abbott and Turnbull governments have cut $338 million from the ABC’s funding”
Yes Mr. Murdoch, no problem sir, consider it done…
… of course what Mr Muller conveniently omits to mention is that the $338 million is spread over nine financial years during which the ABC’s taxpayer-funded appropriation will be close to $10 billion – so less than 3.5%. Any commercial operation in the real world competing against the international giants invading their territory would be thankful for such a small reduction in revenue.
By ‘editorial independence’ you mean, of course, ceaseless, unwavering left-wing clap trap funded by Australian taxpayers.
That a “senior research fellow” at the “Centre for Advancing Journalism, University of Melbourne” could write such rubbish is troubling, particularly for any student unfortunate enough to come under his tutelage.
To start with, in (repeatedly) lining up a private-enterprise media outlet – The Age – against a publicly funded one, he’s comparing apples and oranges.
Also, he states as a fact that the ABC has been subjected to “relentless bullying”. What rot.
He fails to address the reason why people want it privatised, shut down, whatever: It’s rampant, daily, inherent bias.
Yes, Labor MPs may well be criticised, but always from the left.
I employ journalists regularly.
I sure hope none have been exposed to Mr Muller’s warped view.
I wouldn’t be looking to the Age as a guide for successful philosophical or commercial underpinning of anything. Advertisers abandoned its pages over a few short years as the editorial tone and particularly the columnists increasingly made clear their contempt for ‘trade’ in their relentless attacks on what they saw as consumerism.
Imagine being the advertising manager for a major retailer, invited to regularly spend tens of thousands to extoll the excitement of the very thing being sneeringly derided in the column on the facing page. That would grow old very quickly.
Add to that the fact that ABC Online was able to eat Fairfax’ lunch, indulging their very similar demographics nation-wide for free and denying Fairfax any chance of ever erecting a paywall in the transition to online. An unfettered ABC in this context has done our industry more harm than good.
If only the ABC did as the above recommended:
“The proprietors acknowledge that journalists, artists and photographers must record the affairs of the city, state, nation and the world fairly, fully and regardless of any commercial, political or personal interests, including those of any proprietors, shareholders or board members”
But the ABC journalists, in fact the complete ABC outlook is a summation of all the one eyed people inside.
However the biggest issue is that its shareholder is a representative of all Australians and therefore its journalists cannot have their own way in terms of independence. It must cater for all views, and it does not.
The ABC actively interferes with politics to the detriment of, quite often, the mass of voters. It has one line on illegal immigrants, it has one line on the Greens issues on the environment, it has one line on provision of social services, (infinite growth), it has one line on swamping the airwaves with its news and current affairs output, (i.e. its own journalists views) such that no commercial network can get an economic return in this highly profitable current affairs segment of the media audiences.
What these ABC journalists have done is limited the progress of the Aboriginal race socially and economically, it has largely aided the de – industrialisation of Australia though its economically illiterate “green” advocacy, and led, through its multicultural based high population immigration support, despoiled the infrastructure amenities and social comfort for existing tax payers .
What a trail of woe.
Enough of the self righteous posturing. The ABC can remain “independent” yet be made accountable. When you take money from taxpayers, there are strings attached, like it or not.
Every government organisation operates by that principle.
The ABC is no special case, and if it thinks it is, it needs to be shut down immediately then rebooted with adults in charge. Right now the ABC is behaving like young adolescents who’ve been told they have to to chores to justify their pocket money. Grow up!
If you want to know what IPA employees do during their coffee break, read the comments above.
Geez Mumbrella, It’s not even a full moon yet, but here they are trolling en masse, the usual angry Murdoch ugly’s.
Roger Colman; Don’t be such a blow- hard. Remember the ‘Less Is More’. Ad?
Mueller completely misses the point. Editorial leadership is about quality. The problem is that too many organisations in media don’t employ leaders who understand the consumer.
The Age and the ABC (and the Oz) are platforms for individuals who think journalism is about lecturing the public.
What the digital era has done is put the power with consumers. They simply go find what they need rather than be force fed by dominant channels.
Right now the biggest business opportunity is for a media investor who gets that. And an abc board that is not clueless about content.
Trust.
Do I trust the ABC to:
1. Cover the energy debate in a balanced fashion?
2. Cover the environment in a balanced fashion?
3. Cover the struggle of our regions (against the latest refugee / humanitarian expose)?
4. Cover the political debate in a balanced fashion?
5. Cover news stories that don’t fit it’s oft-denied-yet-ever-present ideology or politics (eg. an ex-PM being investigated by two sets of state police for corruption – and the ABC judging this as not news-worthy?)
No – I do not trust the ABC any more.
Yes – I would like to see it reformed.
And finally, no – I don’t think I’m a minority view on this.
Well that’s a bit of the chicken and the egg….the reason you don’t known you are in the minority for not trusting the source is because you don’t trust the source which shows you are in the minority.
… said with the confidence of someone who doesn’t actually know anything about it …
According to figures promulgated by the very people who are organising the protests against the upcoming “freeze” to taxpayer funds, the ABC is “trusted” by 82% of the population, but only “accessed” by less than 50% in any given week (12 million). That means that a third of the population who say they trust the ABC do so without actually viewing, listening or reading anything it produces.