Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 
Send Topic Print
Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats (Read 45373 times)
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #60 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 3:12pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
You should start with the home page of this website. There is a link in the OP.


Nope. The only two links in the OP are to two threads that copy the exact same article.

freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
I provided a brief explanation with links to more detailed explanations.


Not only did you not provide any links to "more detailed explanations", you didn't even provide anything resembling a "brief explanation" of your own. And that would have been very simple to do and wouldn't have taken much more space. Something like "The order-elected method: The six longer-term seats are given to the first six to make it past the 7.69 per cent quota." and "The recount method: To divvy up the short and long-term positions, the votes have to be recounted as if a normal election had been held. Every senator who manages to achieve 14.29 per cent of their state's vote gets a six-year term (the quota needed for a regular election)." Note these quotes are from an ABC article, which is ironic since you are accusing them of not providing "basic facts" - yet they were the ones providing these most fundamental "basic facts" whereas you left them out. Your appeal consists of basically saying "the senate decided on an unfair method - I'm not going to give you even the most basic facts as to why I consider it unfair - you'll just have to trust me, and get angry like me".

freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
You had to phrase that very carefully didn't you Gandalf? What's already "been told"?


Is it really that difficult to understand this simple point? The deal was made on August 12. Thats worth reporting on, and it was (granted, they don't seem to have reported this together with the fact that it went against previous resolutions). It meant that the vote to make this formal on August 31 became a fait accompli. Reporting on the August 31 vote would be reporting on what we've already "been told" - ie that the senate had decided to use the order elect method. Or to put it another way, we already knew in advance what the result of the August 31 vote would be - it therefore makes more sense to report on the decision to make the August 31 vote a fait accompli, rather than the vote itself.

freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
Do you think it is a little odd that only articles from before the August 12 agreement mention the two bipartisan resolutions?


You previously thought that there were no mentions of them anywhere since the Antony Green blog - which was written in April.

The point is, as I keep saying, all the relevant facts were mentioned at some point by the media: the two resolutions, the August 12 agreement (along with critical analysis) - as well as, most critically, actual explanations about what the two methods for senate-term determination are. These are the only relevant facts - the August 31 vote was not relevant as I have already explained. The Australian public had all the information they needed to understand that a) the senate went against their own resolutions and b) that the method chosen was a cynical piece of collusion by the major parties to (in the words of one article) 'feather their own senate nests". You can no longer pretend that these relevant facts were not reported, the best you can do now is whinge about the media not spoonfeeding us confected outrage (and treat us all like mugs in the process by telling us to be outraged without giving us even the most basic information), as opposed to treating us like adults who can make our own minds up with all the relevant facts as reported.






Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #61 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 3:13pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
Do Muslims lie out of habit?


freediver wrote on Sep 14th, 2016 at 9:31pm:
Do Muslims always carry on like this?



Real classy FD. Congratulations, you are entering the debating sophistication level of sprint and issuevoter.
How about we stick to the topic and leave out petty personal attacks eh?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #62 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:20pm
 
Oh look, another lengthy post from Gandalf in which he completely dodged the main issue.

Be honest Gandalf, if it is not too much to ask. Do you think the media reported appropriately on the bipartisan resolutions of 1998 and 2010 in the wake of both parties deciding to break those promises in order to steal a senate seat each?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37871
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #63 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:22pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:20pm:
Oh look, another lengthy post from Gandalf in which he completely dodged the main issue.

Be honest Gandalf, if it is not too much to ask. Do you think the media reported appropriately on the bipartisan resolutions of 1998 and 2010 in the wake of both parties deciding to break those promises in order to steal a senate seat each?


Ah.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #64 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:30pm
 
I still do not think they have reported on it at all, but I wanted Gandalf to focus on the issue rather than trying desperately to find one exception. The first three articles Gandalf presented as evidence that they reported on it did not mention it at all. In his next attempt he presented an article from before the August 12 announcement.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37871
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #65 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:37pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:30pm:
I still do not think they have reported on it at all, but I wanted Gandalf to focus on the issue rather than trying desperately to find one exception. The first three articles Gandalf presented as evidence that they reported on it did not mention it at all. In his next attempt he presented an article from before the August 12 announcement.


Why is this worthy of an on-going debate which is now reduced to the usual 'he said,' 'I said,' whinge?  'No-one' is even remotely interested in the substantive issue.  That's why it is not a raging front page story and never was or will be.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #66 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:42pm
 
Good point Aussie. Why do people keep responding to this thread when they have nothing to say? It seems a bit silly don't you think?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37871
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #67 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:50pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:42pm:
Good point Aussie. Why do people keep responding to this thread when they have nothing to say? It seems a bit silly don't you think?


Indeed.  I'll leave you and Gandalf to have at your usual merry go round stuff.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #68 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:53pm
 
Before you go Aussie, do you have an opinion on the topic, or did you just pop back in to remind people that you are absent of thoughts on the issue?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Unforgiven
Gold Member
*****
Offline


I have sinned

Posts: 8879
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #69 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 7:14pm
 
freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:53pm:
Before you go Aussie, do you have an opinion on the topic, or did you just pop back in to remind people that you are absent of thoughts on the issue?


Why doesn't Freediver open its baggage and expose his motives to the light?
Back to top
 

“I’ll let you be in my dreams if I can be in yours” Bob Dylan
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #70 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 7:27pm
 
Ah FD appeals to honesty.

In this spirit of honesty FD, would you care to acknowledge that in your little spiel on the home page you provided no information whatsoever on the two methods for deciding the senate terms - despite claiming otherwise?

freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:20pm:
Oh look, another lengthy post from Gandalf in which he completely dodged the main issue.



A big part of this issue FD is the way you yourself are trying to report (spin?) this story. And the further we delve into it, the more it unravels. First we have the outrage over the non-reporting of the August 31 vote - misleadingly inferring that the actual decision itself went by with no scrutiny. Then we find out that in fact the decision itself was made on August 12 - which was widely reported. You didn't bother to point out that the August 31 vote was a rubber stamp on a deal that was already made - which would have shown that particular non-reporting in a completely different light. Second we have your assumption that no media outlet mentioned the two resolutions since Antony Green's blog article about them in April - while it took me about 5 seconds to find 3 separate ABC articles not just mentioning them, but providing an APH link giving more details on them. And finally there's your arrogant dismissal of the public's intelligence by spoonfeeding us confected outrage about the allegedly "unfair" method of senate term allocation, without giving us any idea about why it was unfair - other than your say-so. As if that wasn't bad enough - you then assure us that you provided information as well as links explaining the two methods - when you didn't.

freediver wrote on Sep 15th, 2016 at 6:20pm:
Be honest Gandalf, if it is not too much to ask. Do you think the media reported appropriately on the bipartisan resolutions of 1998 and 2010 in the wake of both parties deciding to break those promises in order to steal a senate seat each?


FD the rationale you attempted to use to justify this episode as "inappropriate" reporting has been so thoroughly dismantled that we really have to revisit what we mean by appropriate. Your central thesis that the media was negligent in reporting "basic facts" has been proven to be patently false: all the relevant facts were reported at some point or other, and the only argument you have left is that they weren't reported at the right time. You think they should have contextualised the relevant facts and wrapped them all up in one neat little package that could be spoonfed to us. Lets call it an 'outrage package'. And yes, there's something to be said of that - it was a little surprising that the resolutions weren't mentioned in the same reports as the labor-liberal deal. But that is nowhere near all the crap you were crying about - the alleged lack of criticism (there was criticism), the non-reporting of the cynical labor-liberal deal (it was covered) or the claim that the resolutions hadn't been reported on since April (it was).

The long and the short of it is, the Australian public had all the information they needed to understand that this was a cynical deal by the majors to consolidate their hold on the senate, and that it went against two resolutions that the senate made. Thats really whats important here, and so in answer to your question - essentially yes it was "appropriately" reported on.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #71 - Sep 15th, 2016 at 8:18pm
 
Quote:
Your central thesis that the media was negligent in reporting "basic facts" has been proven to be patently false: all the relevant facts were reported at some point or other, and the only argument you have left is that they weren't reported at the right time. You think they should have contextualised the relevant facts and wrapped them all up in one neat little package that could be spoonfed to us.


Yes Gandalf, that is what journalism is. If politicians or political parties break promises, you present what they promised previously and what they are doing now. You do not report on what they promised before they make up their mind, then go silent on it once they announce to do the opposite of what they promised.

Even this they barely managed to do - the only examples I have seen from prior to the announcement are the Antony Green article and the example you produced earlier in the thread.

It is lazy, incompetent journalism at best. Repeated promises to do the opposite of what they are now doing is not, as you suggest, some kind of marginally relevant contextualisation, particularly on an issue as important as an election outcome and where the promise was delivered in the form of two bipartisan senate resolutions. There is a very good chance that this will affect legislative outcomes post 2019.

Whatever your motives for defending the media, you are being disingenuous, and you have resorted to blatant lies in order to defend your position.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #72 - Sep 16th, 2016 at 12:02pm
 
The deal removes Hinch and others that are a disgrace. Not that I find the method used to be in any way unfair. Last-in, first-out. Hard to disagree with that.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #73 - Sep 16th, 2016 at 12:14pm
 
FD what "blatant lies" have I resorted to?

Would you call insisting you provided information, including links, about the two resolutions on your home page article a lie? Or would you like to go on the record that it was an honest mistake on your part? Either way the information you insisted was there is not.

I just thought its prudent to mention this while you are throwing the accusation of lying at me.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 16th, 2016 at 12:43pm by polite_gandalf »  

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48062
At my desk.
Re: Media asleep at the wheel on stolen senate seats
Reply #74 - Sep 17th, 2016 at 10:59am
 
Quote:
The deal removes Hinch and others that are a disgrace. Not that I find the method used to be in any way unfair. Last-in, first-out. Hard to disagree with that.


Both Labor and the coalition disagree, if you take their word for it (when they have no vested interest, that is).

Again I ask Longy, do you think there are bigger principles at stake here than who you want to win?

Quote:
Would you call insisting you provided information, including links, about the two resolutions on your home page article a lie?


The information and links are still there Gandalf, along with plenty mroe that you insist is not.



This is the only direct report I have found on the date of the senate vote:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2016/September/Rotation_of_senators

The Senate resolved this issue on its second sitting day. On 31 August 2016 Senator Fifield moved:

That, pursuant to section 13 of the Constitution, the senators chosen for each state be divided into two classes, as follows:

Senators listed at positions 7 to 12 on the certificate of election of senators for each state shall be allocated to the first class and receive 3 year terms.

Senators listed at positions 1 to 6 on the certificate of election of senators for each state shall be allocated to the second class and receive 6 year terms.


The motion was passed 50 to 15. The Ayes included the Coalition and ALP senators, and the Noes included Senators Day, Hinch, Leyonhjelm and the Nick Xenophon Team and Australian Greens senators.



http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2016/January/Doubledissolution

On 29 June 1998, the Senate agreed to a motion by the then Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator John Faulkner, indicating support for the use of section 282 in a future division of the Senate. Senator Faulkner expressed the Opposition’s view that a decision to adopt the section 282 recount method should be made prior to any double dissolution election, and that the section 282 method was the fairest mechanism for dividing senators into the two classes. However, it was pointed out by Senator Bob Brown that the Senate could change the mechanism in the future. On 22 June 2010 the Senate agreed to an identical motion by the then Shadow Special Minister of State, Senator Michael Ronaldson, without debate.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 
Send Topic Print