Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

It would seem Andrew Leigh thinks we’re the problem

By johnboy 1 August 2012 28

Andrew Leigh has published his speech to the University of Canberra on the media, which he saw fit to give to the Canberra Times last night.

In it he announces the problems of journalism in the new era to be “To Much Opinion”, “Nastiness”, and “Shallowness”.

As a solution he proposes State funding of “quality” journalism which presumably will not write opinionated, nasty, shallow things about the State.

Which would be almost funny if the vast majority of Government advertising spend didn’t already go to the dying “quality” media which exists largely to serve needs of MPs like Andrew Leigh already.

At least if the advertising dollars got shifted to subsidy they wouldn’t have to justify the evaporating audiences.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
It would seem Andrew Leigh thinks we’re the problem
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
HenryBG 2:25 pm 06 Aug 12

nobody said :

SnapperJack said :

Could you please stop providing links to left wing media to try and back up your arguments? The ABC, SMH, New York Times, the usual suspects. Their credibility is zero. There are several climate change scientists and reformed greenies who have come to their senses. They have contacted conservative and climate realist websites and tried to get their stories into the media. The few newspapers who have tried to run their stories have received threats from climate change cultists and have had to stop running the stories.

I find your user name – Nobody – to be quite accurate because that is what you and the other glassy-eyed climate change believers are.

The New York Times has won 106 Pulitzer Prizes for journalism excellence, and has plenty of credibility. The story they published is an opinion piece written by Richard Muller himself, explaining how his research changed him from a skeptic to now accepting climate change is real and caused by humans. Have you read the piece written by Richard?
?

No, he gets his science from the weather-man and uni-drop-out Anthony Watts.
Much more sound than all this lefty “research” and “data” and so forth.

nobody 11:55 am 06 Aug 12

SnapperJack said :

Could you please stop providing links to left wing media to try and back up your arguments? The ABC, SMH, New York Times, the usual suspects. Their credibility is zero. There are several climate change scientists and reformed greenies who have come to their senses. They have contacted conservative and climate realist websites and tried to get their stories into the media. The few newspapers who have tried to run their stories have received threats from climate change cultists and have had to stop running the stories.

I find your user name – Nobody – to be quite accurate because that is what you and the other glassy-eyed climate change believers are.

The New York Times has won 106 Pulitzer Prizes for journalism excellence, and has plenty of credibility. The story they published is an opinion piece written by Richard Muller himself, explaining how his research changed him from a skeptic to now accepting climate change is real and caused by humans. Have you read the piece written by Richard?

In his speech about the media Andrew says “Another way that technology can accentuate nastiness is through anonymity. Increasingly, letters to the editor are being replaced by website comments, blogs and tweets. While letters carried the author’s name, social media is often anonymous or pseudonymous.” Are you guilty of this?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 9:46 am 06 Aug 12

SnapperJack said :

nobody said :

SnapperJack said :

nobody said :

SnapperJack said :

Ah yes, the Labor/Greens way. Funnel taxpayers money into friendly media to keep them writing things you like. It worked a treat with research grants paid to climate “scientists”.

Here is an example of funding supplied by a coal magnate and climate skeptic, to a professor at Berkeley who was also a climate skeptic, and the research found climate change is real and caused by humans. A leader of the climate change skeptics stood up and said he was previously mistaken, and his fresh look at the data made him accept the facts as they fell, climate change is real.

So, if your mind is not completely closed, have a quick read of this story in the SMH.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-results-convert-sceptic-let-the-evidence-change-our-minds-20120730-23769.html#ixzz223BNFZG7

Isn’t it remarkable how Fairfax, the ABC and the other media jumped up and down and gave this story such prominence about how ONE supposed “climate change sceptic” did a backflip and has now converted to the climate change cult, whereas the many climate change scientists and other believers who got sick of taking dirty money and selling out their principles and morals, calmly looked at the statistics and concluded that the theory of anthropomorphic global warming is a hoax were all completely ignored by the media.

It only reinforces the view that this whole climate change thing is an elaborate conspiracy funded by governments in concert with extreme left and green groups.

If you are one of the few who are unable to trust the ABC, then here is the original story in the New York Times on Richard Muller and his realisation Climate Change is real and caused by humans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=1

Who are these mythical climate scientists you claim have recently become climate change denialists, or did you just make that up?

Could you please stop providing links to left wing media to try and back up your arguments? The ABC, SMH, New York Times, the usual suspects. Their credibility is zero. There are several climate change scientists and reformed greenies who have come to their senses. They have contacted conservative and climate realist websites and tried to get their stories into the media. The few newspapers who have tried to run their stories have received threats from climate change cultists and have had to stop running the stories.

I find your user name – Nobody – to be quite accurate because that is what you and the other glassy-eyed climate change believers are.

source?

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 9:21 am 06 Aug 12

DrKoresh said :

milkman said :

DrKoresh said :

SnapperJack said :

Ah yes, the Labor/Greens way. Funnel taxpayers money into friendly media to keep them writing things you like. It worked a treat with research grants paid to climate “scientists”.

Nobody likes the idea of climate change, you contemptuous fool, the suggestion that it is a lie being propagated by people of a certain political ideology is ridiculous. Climate change doesn’t benefit anyone, which is why so much has been done of late to mitigate it’s effects and reduce our contribution to the problem.

Just because it’s unpleasant doesn’t make it a lefty conspiracy, and the denial demonstrated by you and people like you in the face of all the data is childish and shameful. Grow up, please.

This is fair enough, but it would be unreasonable to suggest that there aren’t public and private sector groups who trade off fear, uncertainty and doubt and use this to whip up emotional responses regarding climate change.

I agree that climate change is occurring, and humans are having some impact on this, but I strongly disagree with the tone and approach of some groups.

Oh me too, I can’t stand eco-extremists either, the only group I think is worse are the denialists. But I agree that shutting down industry and moving into mud-huts is an unacceptable solution to the problem, there needs to be a compromise of sorts.

I think the problem is that the science behind climate change is actually very complex, and doesn’t always roll up nicely into a headline or soundbite. The majority of people aren’t smart enough and don’t want to spend the time to really understand, so as a result there will always be misinformation and fearmongering.

As you said, a compromise of some sort is required.

SnapperJack 8:38 am 06 Aug 12

nobody said :

SnapperJack said :

nobody said :

SnapperJack said :

Ah yes, the Labor/Greens way. Funnel taxpayers money into friendly media to keep them writing things you like. It worked a treat with research grants paid to climate “scientists”.

Here is an example of funding supplied by a coal magnate and climate skeptic, to a professor at Berkeley who was also a climate skeptic, and the research found climate change is real and caused by humans. A leader of the climate change skeptics stood up and said he was previously mistaken, and his fresh look at the data made him accept the facts as they fell, climate change is real.

So, if your mind is not completely closed, have a quick read of this story in the SMH.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-results-convert-sceptic-let-the-evidence-change-our-minds-20120730-23769.html#ixzz223BNFZG7

Isn’t it remarkable how Fairfax, the ABC and the other media jumped up and down and gave this story such prominence about how ONE supposed “climate change sceptic” did a backflip and has now converted to the climate change cult, whereas the many climate change scientists and other believers who got sick of taking dirty money and selling out their principles and morals, calmly looked at the statistics and concluded that the theory of anthropomorphic global warming is a hoax were all completely ignored by the media.

It only reinforces the view that this whole climate change thing is an elaborate conspiracy funded by governments in concert with extreme left and green groups.

If you are one of the few who are unable to trust the ABC, then here is the original story in the New York Times on Richard Muller and his realisation Climate Change is real and caused by humans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=1

Who are these mythical climate scientists you claim have recently become climate change denialists, or did you just make that up?

Could you please stop providing links to left wing media to try and back up your arguments? The ABC, SMH, New York Times, the usual suspects. Their credibility is zero. There are several climate change scientists and reformed greenies who have come to their senses. They have contacted conservative and climate realist websites and tried to get their stories into the media. The few newspapers who have tried to run their stories have received threats from climate change cultists and have had to stop running the stories.

I find your user name – Nobody – to be quite accurate because that is what you and the other glassy-eyed climate change believers are.

shauno 11:40 pm 05 Aug 12

DrKoresh said :

SnapperJack said :

Ah yes, the Labor/Greens way. Funnel taxpayers money into friendly media to keep them writing things you like. It worked a treat with research grants paid to climate “scientists”.

Nobody likes the idea of climate change, you contemptuous fool, the suggestion that it is a lie being propagated by people of a certain political ideology is ridiculous. Climate change doesn’t benefit anyone, which is why so much has been done of late to mitigate it’s effects and reduce our contribution to the problem.

Just because it’s unpleasant doesn’t make it a lefty conspiracy, and the denial demonstrated by you and people like you in the face of all the data is childish and shameful. Grow up, please.

Whats wrong with climate change? After all if it wasnt for climate change who knows Humans might not have even evolved. Also they might not have even bothered to move out of Africa.

shauno 11:36 pm 05 Aug 12

What is about the left that wants to control the media. What he wants is nothing short of a Soviet Politburo propaganda outfit. He wants it so that the media presents opinions that he agrees with nothing else will be acceptable.

DrKoresh 6:24 pm 05 Aug 12

milkman said :

DrKoresh said :

SnapperJack said :

Ah yes, the Labor/Greens way. Funnel taxpayers money into friendly media to keep them writing things you like. It worked a treat with research grants paid to climate “scientists”.

Nobody likes the idea of climate change, you contemptuous fool, the suggestion that it is a lie being propagated by people of a certain political ideology is ridiculous. Climate change doesn’t benefit anyone, which is why so much has been done of late to mitigate it’s effects and reduce our contribution to the problem.

Just because it’s unpleasant doesn’t make it a lefty conspiracy, and the denial demonstrated by you and people like you in the face of all the data is childish and shameful. Grow up, please.

This is fair enough, but it would be unreasonable to suggest that there aren’t public and private sector groups who trade off fear, uncertainty and doubt and use this to whip up emotional responses regarding climate change.

I agree that climate change is occurring, and humans are having some impact on this, but I strongly disagree with the tone and approach of some groups.

Oh me too, I can’t stand eco-extremists either, the only group I think is worse are the denialists. But I agree that shutting down industry and moving into mud-huts is an unacceptable solution to the problem, there needs to be a compromise of sorts.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site