I'm not going to bother responding to the other guy at length, i don't have the patience to go through it or the crayons to explain it on a level that he might understand. An opinion that's objectively disproven but still held is a symptom of long term tribal indoctrination, brought on by the level of control the media has over you, and an unwillingness to grow as a person. Screaming 'i'm right because i say so" in the face of objective evidence to the contrary will never ever make it true, and the refusal to even consider statistical evidence that your opinion might be misinformed is exactly how you will be manipulated into exploitation, in whatever form it may take. This is exactly what i'm talking about when I describe Tribalism.
I am on a crusade to prevent the spread of misinformation.
You are entirely entitled to whatever you want to express short of the hate speech that was being presented in here when I 'stormed off'. But I am also entitled to review any statement that gets made and point out that why it's inaccurate.
Troy McLure wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:16 am
Regarding the ABC stats about percentage of time spent talking about the LNP, that may be factually correct but from what I see they spend most of the time whacking them for this and that. ABC should be bang in the middle but I don’t think they are. Just my opinion. And for what it’s worth I’m not a regular Herald Sun reader anymore, they are like the ABC but to the right.
Left or right black or white, we’re just going in circles now. Treat others how you want to be treated and most things should fall into place.
Troy, you on the other hand seem pretty switched on and willing to engage in a sensible conversation. I did not mean to be offensive in any of the statements I made regarding your opinion and I apologise if that's how it was interpreted. You asked a question that is actually really really relevant and i provided an objectively true answer. Let me expand more.
The ABC appear to be constantly whacking the LNP in the last few years, because of two reasons.
Firstly, the LNP is in power and therefor is making the decisions, it's extremely difficult to write a story on the opposition because they largely don't do anything. This is one of the prime criticisms of both Shorten and to a lesser extent Albo. Shorten couldn't seem to get peoples attention no matter what he said or did, and Albo is only marginally better. The LNP, on the other hand, being in power and therefor actually making decisions that mean something, are subject to heavy criticism from any central platform because a whole bunch of what they are doing is not backed by good research, evidence or statistics. It's impossible to implement any effective policy when you're not in power, so for as long as the LNP are in power, they are going to be subject to the majority of the criticism for their policy. This isn't biased, it's the difference between reporting and opinion.
Secondly, the vast, vast majority of the Australian mainstream media is owned by the same guy. While the way they are expressed changes from source to source, the same series of talking points can be seen being repeated again and again by anyone owned by the Murdoch Corporation. There are, absolutely, left wing media outlets that pull just as far to the left as the Herald Sun pulls to the right. Vice, Buzzfeed and similar sites do dominate a very real proportion of the online media landscape, and the opinions presented within them are just as insane as some of the garbage you hear coming out of people like Alan Jones.
The link i provided shows that there is a tiny tiny little difference in the amount of time spent on the ABC prior to the last election dedicated to the LNP and Labor. The LNP had a very slightly greater share of radio time, while Labor had a very slightly greater share of TV and the written stories on the internet. The differences are all less than 5% and when you balance it out across all forms of media, I think the number works out to .6% bias in favor of Labor. The difference is so small it is statistically irrelevant when you're talking about election campaigns. The Murdoch media, on the other hand, literally ran 7 negative articles about labor for every 1 negative article about the LNP. This difference is 700%.
0.6% for the ABC, 700% for the Murdoch press. I can dig more sources out if I absolutely have too but as far as i can tell nobody on here bothers to read them anyway.
You can physically manifest the difference of how far left the ABC reporting was in the last election compared to how far right the reporting was from Murdoch using a simple analogy of geography. Let's assume that a .1% bias represents 100 metres of actual physical distance. If I stand at Fed Square in Melbourne, facing where Young and Jacksons used to be, and I turn left and walk to the aquarium, I would be at the physical representation of how far left the ABC is. It's bout 600m, it's a fair whack, and it would take me about 10 mintues to walk there. Most of us have probably actually done this. Now if I was to turn right instead of left, and walk to the physical manifestation of the Murdoch media on our hypothetical political map of Melbourne, assuming I could walk in a straight line, I would literally end up in Sydney.
One more time. I genuinely believe that WW3 is being fought through misinformation, and the more we can do to stop the spread of misinformation, the better society will become.
Also, the far left is just as out of their freaking minds as the far right, as demonstrated recently. I think this is the best example of it being broken down i've ever seen, and these guys are utterly hilarious at the same time, you only need to listen to the first 20 minutes.
Language warning etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZZNvT1vaJg&t=
Also since we're on a fishing forum. Quick report, 40 hour round trip, still no Victorian rock based tuna.
Statistically possible, but unbelievably difficult.
Chasing LBG and sharing a love for the Martial Arts, everywhere, all the time.
LBG Season 2023/4 :
Kingfish : 91
Longtail : 1
