💧Concerned Senior

😃Concerned Senior citizen about Australia's future. Not politically biased, distrustful of all politicians.

[💧Concerned Senior @Kencolau1]

@Maga_Trigger yes

[Lefty Keperra Bogan 😎 @Justabogan]

Haven't done this for a while just seeing if there's a major difference from 3 months ago

If there was an election held next weekend which political party would most likely get your vote. #Auspol #poll

[Raven (Kwaagum) @Raven_Satanas]

Temperature time Twittersphere.

If the Federal Election was held tomorrow who would you vote for?
#auspol
#Auspol2024

[Lefty Keperra Bogan 😎 @Justabogan]

What a nasty bitter miserable corrupt woman.. If you agree please repost. 😩 @PaulineHansonOz #auspol

[Craig Hill @CraigHill01]

Do you think Scott Morrison deliberately tried to cover up the Iraq war documents by not releasing them? #auspol

[Raven (Kwaagum) @Raven_Satanas]

So out of curiosity (and as the "legitimate" polls on choose selected people) if the election was tomorrow, how would you vote?
#auspol

[Dan Fangirl 🤓 @ChristyDanFan]

Share if you believe and you know that the majority of Australia’s mainstream media is completely biased. Unbalanced. And cheers on the L-NP all the time. And uses Liberal Party members opinions as news. Share if you’re completely over it!

Let’s make some noise.
#OurMediaSucks

[ShiannonCorcoran💉x4 @shiannonc.bsky.social @ShiannonC]

‘Crikey’s Arsehats of the Year for 2023 are:

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, Nyunggai Warren Mundine, Gary Johns, Michaelia Cash

‘When it came to wounding public discourse and damaging crucial institutions, the biggest arsehats of 2023 were clear’

.. and rightly so. These cringey ‘we are not racists but we will push white privilege, racism and division as far as it will go’ are responsible - along with a complicit media - for the most hate-filled rhetoric, lies and disinformation ever seen in modern history.

.. and they have set the rights of Indigenous Australians back decades.

Crikey also gave a dishonourable mention of Peter Dutton, “who has really proved his genius at arsehattery by finding a way to get an implicit win in Arsehat of the Year despite having been removed from contention because he won too easily in previous years”

Crikey literally had to remove Dutton from the race so that the other ‘arsehats of the year’ could get a look in.

Says a lot about that cretin.

[Rex Patrick @MrRexPatrick]

The US has requested Australia send a warship to the Red Sea in response to Iran-backed Houthi rebels threatening to block ships heading to Israel while the offensive on Gaza continues. How should the Govt respond? #auspol #Isreal #GazaAttack

[Dr. Anastasia Maria Loupis @DrLoupis]

Agreed.

[Just Your Average Punter @Your_Avg_Punter]

Just a simple RT if you think Peter Dutton is a complete arsehole

[MattGolding Cartoons @GoldingCartoons]

Democracy sausage. Today's @theage @smh cartoon.

[MFWitches @MFWitches]

A lot of Aussies would be surprised to learn that around the world, there are lively debates on whether bike helmets should be mandatory for recreational cycling.

In fact, many would be amazed to learn just 4 four countries on the planet (Australia, New Zealand, Argentina and Cyprus) have mandatory helmet laws for all.

What’s the reason you (probably) didn’t know this?

It’s because journalists here don’t talk about the complex nature of this issue, and don’t engage in “both sides” discussions about helmet use. They have (as a cohort) absorbed the idea mandatory helmets are always good.

Yet bicycle helmets ARE a problematic issue in many countries. This is because a lot of research shows recreational cyclists ride less when made to wear a helmet, and the adverse health outcomes from the ensuing reduction in population-wide fitness levels causes more health problems than the comparatively rare incidence of head injuries caused by not wearing a helmet.

Whether you agree with this conclusion about helmets or not is irrelevant here, so don’t attack us or spam this thread with information about the efficacy of helmets. It’s not the point, as we’re not advocating either for or against bike helmets.

Our point is that the complexities of the issue are real, and in other countries they discuss and debate those matters. But not here. In Australia, the media just doesn’t go there, because they consider debate on this issue ridiculous and dangerous.

We could apply this curiosity about what our media will and won’t discuss to many other subjects and issues. In fact, all of us could come up with a range of topics and laws where we believe the current situation or truth is wrong, but it’s not an issue the media will discuss.

Some are issues which aren’t discussed because they’re considered beyond the pale for various reasons, but many we don’t discuss just because … we don’t. There are hundreds of important topics which just don’t get media traction, ever.

So, what are we getting at here?

Simply to say that Australia’s media like to claim they always or nearly always present “both sides” of issues because it’s the right thing to do, and they say this as if they’re always or nearly always impartial about these decisions. As if the decisions just come out of thin air: a topic arises, and they discuss it.

And that’s just a flat-out lie. On hundreds of topics, the Australian media refuses to discuss views other than those they consider the “right” opinion.

If we look at this more closely, we see that in general, the only issues where Aussie media strenuously defend their right to present “both sides” are political ones (and other issues which influence politics such as matters of oppression or cost-of-living topics).

And since we all know our commercial media are heavily right-wing because they’re owned by fossil fuel oligarchs or other conservative shitheads, this leads to the only conclusion possible: the media defend their right to present “both sides” because it suits them to sow doubt, and it suits them to repeat lies or showcase the voices they want to highlight using methods they couldn’t use if they were committed to telling the truth. Nearly all Australia’s profit-making media do this, of course, but so do the ABC and others at times, for reasons we’ve highlighted before.

So next time a journalist or media org defend their right to tell “both sides” on an issue, remind them that their willingness to tell both sides is extremely selective and very, very carefully planned. It’s not innocent or innocuous or just part of telling the news.

In fact, it’s dangerous and anti-democracy, and if we don’t fight back we’ll go the way of other democracies hanging on by their fingernails based on an explosion of lies.

If we can discuss and destroy this stupid but pervasive myth, we can move on and address journalistic malpractice and the dissemination of misinformation more fully.

And we must.

#NewsCorpse
#SevenSucks
#BinBen

[Barrie Cassidy @barriecassidy]

This is such a game changer.

[💧Concerned Senior @Kencolau1]

Facebook have suspended RMIT FactLab from their fact-checking program just right after Sky News launched a campaign designed to undermine fact-checkers. Will you sign the petition, demanding Facebook clean up their platform? https://t.co/8FgVyuabfH

[Mike Carlton @MikeCarlton01]

So Qantas was actually selling tickets for flights it KNEW did not exist !?!?

https://t.co/pRROrDDQwM

[Anthony Albanese @AlboMP]

RT if you think it’s wrong that the Liberals have spent $1 billion on government advertising since 2013.

[John Hewson @JohnRHewson]

Cut through all the media hype of recent times and recognise Dutton has embarked on a disgraceful campaign to use a host of social issues to muddy the water on the Voice debate, hoping to scare people into voting against the referendum.There seems no limit to how low he will go.

[💧Concerned Senior @Kencolau1]

Anti-ABC voices are calling for the ABC to be defunded ahead of the critical May budget. But already over 165,000 people are fighting back, drowning out the Murdoch Press and demanding strong funding for ABC! Will you join us? https://t.co/m0IyMnCGAG

[MFWitches @MFWitches]

Question. Do you believe Peter Dutton is primarily:
A. A clever, capable man now hamstrung by a party in disarray and a need to bow to the needs of his powerful QLD and Nationals MPs?
B. An absolute fucking bellend without charisma, intelligence or compassion?
OR
C. Something else? (Pls explain in a reply.)