Link.

Imagine the outcry there would be from the CBA if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of an ANZ teller?

Imagine the outcry there would be from Caltex if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of a BP console operator?"

Etc.

I'd have no problem if the Title was "Diary in the Life of a rideshare driver."

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 3:56pm:

Link. Imagine the outcry there would be from the CBA if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of an ANZ teller? Imagine the outcry there would be from Caltex if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of a BP console operator?" Etc. I'd have no problem if the Title was "Diary in the Life of a rideshare driver."

It's a drama series. Are you saying their current(?) drama series "Pine Gap" is an endorsement of US/AUS spying?

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 4:26pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 3:56pm: Link. Imagine the outcry there would be from the CBA if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of an ANZ teller? Imagine the outcry there would be from Caltex if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of a BP console operator?" Etc. I'd have no problem if the Title was "Diary in the Life of a rideshare driver." It's a drama series. Are you saying their current(?) drama series "Pine Gap" is an endorsement of US/AUS spying?

Is Pine Gap a commercial enterprise?  An international corporation conducting commerce in Australia?  Or is it a 'defence etc' facility?  Does Pine Gap have any market competitors? Was 'Rake' a commercial enterprise etc etc etc?

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 4:30pm:

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:26pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 3:56pm: Link. Imagine the outcry there would be from the CBA if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of an ANZ teller? Imagine the outcry there would be from Caltex if the ABC (supposed to be an entity which does not endorse a commercial product) ran a programme titled "Diary of a BP console operator?" Etc. I'd have no problem if the Title was "Diary in the Life of a rideshare driver." It's a drama series. Are you saying their current(?) drama series "Pine Gap" is an endorsement of US/AUS spying? Is Pine Gap a commercial enterprise?  An international corporation conducting commerce in Australia?  Or is it a 'defence etc' facility?  Does Pine Gap have any market competitors? Was 'Rake' a commercial enterprise etc etc etc?

It's still just a drama series. As for the ANZ/CBA etc, they could easily use "Diary of a Bank teller". What could they replace Uber with? How could they tell the story without it? Pehaps you should watch it, it may not shine a positive light on them at all for all you know. It's not about the company, it's about a driver.

Quote:

What could they replace Uber with?

Gawd! 

https://media2.giphy.com/media/XsUtdIeJ0MWMo/source.gif

Link.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 4:50pm:

Quote: What could they replace Uber with? Gawd!  Link.

And if they used any of those names that would change things how? Unless you meant "taxi service" which as you have argued is not the same as Uber.

stop it you two  ;D

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 4:55pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:50pm: Quote: What could they replace Uber with? Gawd!  Link. And if they used any of those names that would change things how? Unless you meant "taxi service" which as you have argued is not the same as Uber.

Farq me...have you been taking extra stupid pills today?

I said in the OP....I'd have no issue with the ABC doing a "Diary of a Ride Share Driver," which makes no reference to any specific commercial corporation as Uber is and as the others in that link are.

The ABC is supposed NOT to be supportive of ANY private commercial interest, yes?

Is Uber a commercial interest/entity numbnuts?

Do you think ABC will be in breach of their charter?

Gordon wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

Do you think ABC will be in breach of their charter?

Yes.  Do you?

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:16pm:

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:55pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:50pm: Quote: What could they replace Uber with? Gawd!  Link. And if they used any of those names that would change things how? Unless you meant "taxi service" which as you have argued is not the same as Uber. Farq me...have you been taking extra stupid pills today? I said in the OP....I'd have no issue with the ABC doing a "Diary of a Ride Share Driver," which makes no reference to any specific commercial corporation as Uber is and as the others in that link are. The ABC is supposed NOT to be supportive of ANY private commercial interest, yes? Is Uber a commercial interest/entity numbnuts?

Are they all the same? Is there something that makes Uber unique? Anyway, it's named the way it is because of what it is based on. You are seeing a commercial advantage given to Uber and that is in no why known to be true. It could be negative.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:16pm:

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:55pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 4:50pm: Quote: What could they replace Uber with? Gawd!  Link. And if they used any of those names that would change things how? Unless you meant "taxi service" which as you have argued is not the same as Uber. Farq me...have you been taking extra stupid pills today? I said in the OP....I'd have no issue with the ABC doing a "Diary of a Ride Share Driver," which makes no reference to any specific commercial corporation as Uber is and as the others in that link are. The ABC is supposed NOT to be supportive of [highlight]ANY private commercial interest, yes?[/highlight] Is Uber a commercial interest/entity numbnuts?

Where are they being supportive of Uber? It's a story about people, the driver, not a commercial for Uber.

Quote:

Are they all the same? Is there something that makes Uber unique? Anyway, it's named the way it is because of what it is based on. You are seeing a commercial advantage given to Uber and that is in no why known to be true. It could be negative.

Is Caltex, BP etc all the same?  Are the Banks all the same?  No, they aren't.  They are separate and distinct commercial entities operating in competition in the same market.  Neither is Uber the same as LYFT et al.

Hence the ABC, in using Uber in its series Title is giving Uber a marketing advantage over its competitors.  The generic term is 'ride-share.'

"Diary of an OzPol Member."  Does that not attract reader interest to OzPol?

FMD, I can't believe I am having to explain such a basic and obvious point.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:39pm:

Quote: Are they all the same? Is there something that makes Uber unique? Anyway, it's named the way it is because of what it is based on. You are seeing a commercial advantage given to Uber and that is in no why known to be true. It could be negative. Is Caltex, BP etc all the same?  Are the Banks all the same?  No, they aren't.  They are separate and distinct commercial entities operating in competition in the same market.  Neither is Uber the same as LYFT et al. Hence the ABC, in using Uber in its series Title is giving Uber a marketing advantage over its competitors.  The generic term is 'ride-share.' "Diary of an OzPol Member."  Does that not attract reader interest to OzPol? FMD, I can't believe I am having to explain such a basic and obvious point.

OK. I don't see a problem. It's not advertising. When they do an expose of a commercial entity and name it are they giving it an unfair advantage?

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:26pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:25pm: Do you think ABC will be in breach of their charter? Yes.  Do you?

I'm sure you were a formidable lawyer in your day (particularly when tearing strips off mentally delayed strawberry pickers) but I have a niggling feeling ABC legal has a better understanding of the charter than you.

Gordon wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:44pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:26pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:25pm: Do you think ABC will be in breach of their charter? Yes.  Do you? I'm sure you were a formidable lawyer in your day (particularly when tearing strips off mentally delayed strawberry pickers) but I have a niggling feeling ABC legal has a better understanding of the charter than you.

They may well do.....but this will soon hit the political landscape, and it is not hard to tap into the anti ABC sector to gain support.  I'll bet you that, right now, politicians are being sent complaints...especially those on the anti LNP side.  It gives them something to hang a hat on.

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:44pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:39pm: Quote: Are they all the same? Is there something that makes Uber unique? Anyway, it's named the way it is because of what it is based on. You are seeing a commercial advantage given to Uber and that is in no why known to be true. It could be negative. Is Caltex, BP etc all the same?  Are the Banks all the same?  No, they aren't.  They are separate and distinct commercial entities operating in competition in the same market.  Neither is Uber the same as LYFT et al. Hence the ABC, in using Uber in its series Title is giving Uber a marketing advantage over its competitors.  The generic term is 'ride-share.' "Diary of an OzPol Member."  Does that not attract reader interest to OzPol? FMD, I can't believe I am having to explain such a basic and obvious point. OK. I don't see a problem. It's not advertising. When they do an expose of a commercial entity and name it are they giving it an unfair advantage?

Never.  They are hammering them. 

If you cannot see that the ABC benignly promoting the trade name Uber as a Title to a series is promoting a specific commercial product, then I have nothing which can assist you.  Go have another cone.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:56pm:

Cu Chulainn wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:44pm: Aussie wrote on Jan 5th, 2019 at 5:39pm: Quote: Are they all the same? Is there something that makes Uber unique? Anyway, it's named the way it is because of what it is based on. You are seeing a commercial advantage given to Uber and that is in no why known to be true. It could be negative. Is Caltex, BP etc all the same?  Are the Banks all the same?  No, they aren't.  They are separate and distinct commercial entities operating in competition in the same market.  Neither is Uber the same as LYFT et al. Hence the ABC, in using Uber in its series Title is giving Uber a marketing advantage over its competitors.  The generic term is 'ride-share.' "Diary of an OzPol Member."  Does that not attract reader interest to OzPol? FMD, I can't believe I am having to explain such a basic and obvious point. OK. I don't see a problem. It's not advertising. When they do an expose of a commercial entity and name it are they giving it an unfair advantage? Never.  They are hammering them.  If you cannot see that the ABC benignly promoting the trade name Uber as a Title to a series is promoting a specific commercial product, then I have nothing which can assist you.  Go have another cone.

Your shout, I'm out.

Aussie wrote on Jan 5^th, 2019 at 5:51pm:

They may well do.....but this will soon hit the political landscape, and it is not hard to tap into the anti ABC sector to gain support.  I'll bet you that, right now, politicians are being sent complaints...especially those on the anti LNP side.  It gives them something to hang a hat on.

The Murdoch press have no doubt already written their articles condemning the ABC and are just waiting for the right time to publish