Faith in ourselves (i)

I haven't normally and/or ever felt the need to defend the ABC;  its policies, its reporting and any  particular strengths, weaknesses, biases or general inadequacies.

Last night (Monday 6/10.14)  it was instructive to watch about 2+ hours of broadcast.

The 7.30 Report noted that the current Federal government  didn't really like the ABC. There was the suggestion that no matter what was reported the ABC would be opposed to the right wing government ...commonly called the 'Coalition'. 

But it moved on; the wonderful Australian Story, once again delivered a high quality story about Jack Rogerson, an autistic child who has been so loved by his parents; and so supported by friends, family and community (including the wonderful Jesuit school at Riverview....I think the Society of Jesus would be cautious about claiming particular credit for Jack....but they seem to have got their act together.)
The real people who got their "act together" were: Jack himself; Ian Rogerson, a former media person;  and the extremely impressive Nicole Rogerson. [This all begs the question about what happens to those kids whose parents don't have what the Rogersons had ..financial resources, intellect, insight and capacity...] .  But it was a profound insight about what might happen when faith is bigger than fear!
Well done ABC     more to come!

Too much compassion?

In comparing our two great leaders the ABC news says of Mr Abbott: "A man who is himself plain-spoken to the point of recklessness" and does indeed have a point.

Yesterday I heard him say about the next boat load of people escaping Indonesia..."If we are too compassionate..."

Now my question is "Can you be too compassionate?"

You can be "too kind" or "too naive" but I wouldn't have thought you can be too compassionate. Mr Abbot would know from his, albeit brief, theological training...that the word "passion" in the Latin means suffering, (not lust or romance as the popular mind would sometimes have it). And that compassion is "to suffer with". So either you try to share the suffering of others with them, and hopefully alleviate some of it by sharing it with them or you gameplay. It would seem all too apparent that we are getting ready to play the Tampa game again!

Public broadcasting

Lest we be in doubt about the value of public broadcasting, some programs of the last few days should help us to remember what a privilege it is to have a quality public broadcaster.

• Classic FM's 100 Symphonies last week had the country in a twitter. What huge fun it was to listen to 100 extraordinary symphonies and hear certain presenter illuminate us about them. I just thought it was hilarious the way people kept ringing in...I can't do any work, I have to have 5 radios on...and amazing works you just never hear...The final concert was amazing, and it would never have happened on commercial radio!!
• Landline Although I admit I come back from the Kirk on Sunday morning and just want to veg for an hour. This program is a great way to do it. Highly informative, entertaining and interesting. Real quality stuff. And not an ad in sight
• Australian Story last night about Major Mike Stone in Timor was powerful stuff. If you ever wanted to think we do good through our care for this little fledgling democracy, and through the military, and even through police chaplaincy...then try to watch this if you haven't already.
• But last night I was impressed by Peter Thompson's fine interview on Talking Heads with Guy Cooper the retirng CEO if the Taronga Park zoo. I didn't know of Cooper, but I am always impressed by how Thompson in his low key way draws people out and gets a very incisive story

And all this for 8 cents a day!

The latest biscuit from the barrel

I couldn't believe my ears (when wondering what to blog about this morning) hearing that the latest biscuit to be pulled from the barrel was funding for kids TV to the ABC. (see here)
I actually think this is a good idea. But like all these "good ideas" why are they only being done now...if they are good now they were good a decade ago. And yet the eve of the election is the cynical trigger.
The Friends of the ABC remain unimpressed (as big a group of lefties you could wish to drink with) their spokesperson making the interesting observation

"This act, while on the face of it seems to be really positive, is in fact a further abuse of the independence of the ABC," he said.

"The Government has denied the ABC funding in the past. It's packed the boards with members of right-wing think tanks and the Liberal Party and now it's actually giving away ABC services as election gifts."

I think this is an important (if nuanced) point.

The independence of State owned TV is a major justification for its funding. As soon as funding becomes tied to government policy (however benevolent), then we have not free to air TV but propaganda.

This policy while seemingly good, can only work if accompanied by the total and deliberate unfettering of the funds from government control. One cannot imagine either party, but certainly not the Coalition, agreeing to this. They have steadfastly and ruthlessly failed to fund the ABC either as a news broadcaster or a producer of drama, or children's TV at anything like the real level that was the case in say the 60s or 70s.

I am not a sociologist of note (or anything of note for that matter) but I am a sociologist by training (and indeed by inclination) and I know that the transmission of values is complex and it is key to developing healthy and intellectual society. It happens whether we fund it or not. It is true that advertising works and transmits values...like consume more and fat is good (If it were not so would not the advertising gurus have told us....incidentally I think the correct plural of guru is guruo..... and why would people bother to advertise)

So it could matter that the public broadcaster is funded well enough to at least provide alternative values rather than narrow market-driven values.

So, let's go for it, accept the $68 million if offered unconditionally...but it actually seems like a pathetically small amount any way.

But what would I know, I have already declared I am not a commentator or anything else of note!

Further to your letter....

The ABC's hose down department sent this fairly bland reply to my complaint about the incessant patting of Helen Caldicott in last week's Difference of Opinion (here)

Dear Mr Clark

Thank you for your email regarding the episode of Difference of Opinion broadcast on 19 July.

I am sorry you considered that the conduct of Dr Ziggy Switkowski and Michael Angwin during this episode was sexist, in terms of occasions when they physically touched their fellow panel member Dr Helen Caldicott, seated between them. I can assure you, it was not the intention of the program makers or the ABC to endorse sexist behaviour in broadcasting the conduct to which you refer.

Please be assured, your comments have been noted and conveyed to the producers of Difference of Opinion so they are aware of your concerns regarding the conduct of Dr Switkowski and Mr Angwin. Thank you for bringing this matter to the ABC's attention. I have attached a link to the ABC's Code of Practice for your information: http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/codeprac07.pdf

Yours sincerely etc.etc................