by James O’Neill*
On 18 December last year Gumshoe News published an article of mine on the continuing bias of the Australian mainstream media. It was suggested that this bias, which takes two major forms, was a potential threat to Australia’s national security.
The two major forms were firstly, wilful misreporting of events, as in the ongoing wars in Afghanistan, in Iraq and Syria where there is a constant misrepresentation of facts on the ground. This has potentially serious implications as Australia is involved in each of those wars, illegally as I have consistently argued, and each could easily escalate into a full-scale conflagration with two nuclear superpowers, Russia and China.
It hardly needs emphasizing that a war with our largest trading partner would be monumental stupidity on a number of levels. Notwithstanding what should be self-evidently the case, our politicians continue to make ill considered remarks that potentially damage our essential relationship with China. Similarly, there is no obvious national purpose served by the constant denigration of Russia.
It has been observed that no business ever went broke under-estimating the intelligence of the public. That could be adapted to our politicians who consistently under-estimate the intelligence of the electorate. While the latter may display periodic gullibility, when the penny does drop their reaction can be and will be devastating.
The second major failing identified is the withholding of information that the public is entitled to know. The key to effective decision-making is to have cognizance of all the relevant facts. The withholding of key information undermines the whole principle of having an informed electorate, the better able to choose whom to represent them. In the case of Australia’s involvement in the three wars mentioned above, those two fundamental flaws coalesce: we are constantly fed misinformation on the one hand, and refused relevant information on the other.
Let me demonstrate that point with a recent glaring example. One of the persistent themes of contemporary western propaganda is the constant demonization of Russia and it’s President Vladimir Putin. This demonization takes many forms and even when solid evidence emerges that the supposed origins of Russia’s alleged misbehaviour is a complete furphy, as with the so called ‘Russiagate’ which turns out in fact to be more of an ‘Intelgate’. There is now solid evidence that Russiagate was the creation of a self-serving exercise by the FBI, the Democratic National Committee, and sundry intelligence agencies. Notwithstanding these revelations, the mainstream media blithely continues as though the evidence did not exist.
Another very powerful impetus to the “Russian aggression” meme was given by the Dutch politician Halbe Zijlstra who had alleged that Putin harboured ambitions of a greater Russia that would incorporate Belarus, Ukraine, and the Baltic States, while Kazakhstan was “nice to have as well”.
Zijlstra claimed to have been at a meeting of businessmen (when Zijlstra was an executive with the Shell Oil Company) in 2006 and had overheard Putin make the alleged statement. Zijlstra announced this to a political party conference in 2016 and it was immediately adopted as true by the western media and used repeatedly ever since.
To its credit, the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant was skeptical and made further investigations. Volkskrant discovered that Zijlstra was not even present at the meeting in Russia at the relevant time.
On 13 February Zijlstra admitted to the Dutch parliament (where he held the position of Foreign Minister) that he had lied. He immediately resigned. The whole Greater Russia story fell apart as indeed it should have done when it was first advanced in 2016 and shamelessly repeated ever since.
If you were unaware of this development you could be forgiven if you relied upon Australia’s mainstream media. It did not rate a mention on either ABC or SBS News bulletins, and a Google search of The Australian, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Guardian websites turned up a blank.
It seems that we’re not entitled to know that, yet again, one of the major propaganda themes of this new cold war era had collapsed, had been based on a lie, and was totally devoid of any substance. We should not be surprised. It is entirely consistent with the mainstream media’s approach to its obligations to fully and fairly inform us of all relevant facts. This is especially true when it involves a matter of Australia’s national interest. The approach seems to be; if it doesn’t suit their geopolitical objective, then it doesn’t exist.
Far better in their view that we are distracted by the extramarital shenanigans of a country bumpkin.
*Barrister at Law and geopolitical analyst. He may be contacted at joneill@qldbar.asn.au
Excellent article James. Yes, if the media did surface with a version of the truth, and the Australian public demanded some resignations, there wouldn’t be many cabinet ministers left to run Canberra.
James, you refer to: “the mainstream media’s approach to its obligations to fully and fairly inform us of all relevant facts.”
What obligation? Since when does a business have any obligation?
If news can be counted as a commodity I guess it could fall under the “fit for intended purpose” requirement of the Aus Consumer Law.
But experience has taught me that said ‘Law” is a mere showpiece
caveat emptor
The problem is with “live” radio and TV, you are unable to stop the “purchase, so to speak. You can switch off the TV. But your taxes have paid for the broadcast anyway. I think the “BALANCED” VIEWS is the key. Each person has paid for the running of the ABC. If it lies continually — they have failed their charter.
I think they do have an “obligation”
They are given a license to operate in Australia, and have broadcast licenses. I’d use “accountability” too.
There are “obligations” and a code of conduct to operate financial services for example.
Community broadcasting has to comply to a code that “provide community broadcasting services for the benefit of the community” etc…
Does the ABC and SBS fall into this? I’m sure it does.
ACMA ensures… broadcasters take responsibility for making sure they meet the licence conditions and the requirements in the Codes.
Do we just assume that there should be a balance? Or is there some obligation that you cannot continually LIE about something?
E.G. ABC CHARTER:
Charter of the Corporation
If you lie as a financial adviser, you can lose your licence.
On another subject. I have just been informed that the Federal Government rushed the APRA Bill through parliament on a vote, with only seven (7) of seventy six (76) Senators, being present in the Senate.
This is good old DEMOCRACY!
We citizens should come together to force a referendum to change the Constitution, so that a vote cannot be taken in either House unless there is, at least a 95 percent presence of Senators or Representatives sitting.
The banks are now in a “legal” position to confiscate yours and my deposits in return for worthless bank shares, if you have funds In the Big Four banks. Go get your money now, while you are able.
At this time they cannot refuse your withdrawal. Once the financial crash hits, you will lose everything. And I mean everything, all monies in deposits or fixed deposits.
If this isn’t true, why was this legislation even thought of, and why has the Government been so hell-bent on pushing it through?
Thank you, Mal. It is worth worrying about.
I found this on Parliament’s website:
If it appears, on the report of a division of the Senate by the tellers, that a quorum is not present, the President shall adjourn the Senate till the next sitting day; and no decision of the Senate shall be considered to have been arrived at by such division.
When the President is informed by the Chairman of Committees that a quorum is not present, the bells shall be rung for 4 minutes; the President shall then count the Senate, and if no quorum is then present, shall adjourn the Senate till the next sitting day; but if a quorum is then present, the President shall leave the chair and the committee resume.
If a senator draws attention to the lack of a quorum, the bells shall be rung for 4 minutes; the President shall then count the Senate, and, if a quorum is not present, shall adjourn the Senate till the next sitting day.
It appears they think they can crash the system and still maintain some control over the free-fall. I expect that so many things will cascade into each other and complicate the crash that there will be little control to be made – run for the hills!
No joke, protect yourself…
The problem with colonistpowers is they are run by corporations against the peoples interests, having attempted by militaristic force and eroding sovereign countries and supplying military supplies to despot regimes with no clear moral ideology that is apparent, the first world as can be seen by our politicians having lost their way are creating a path for what is seen as foreign interests to become the new world leaders.
My only argument is that “our” trading partnership with China is of no benefit to anyone other than the Country’s aristocracy and it’s otherwise manifestly unsustainable.
Happy New Year to our Chinese Australians.
We should do a better job of sharing our cultures.
.
Dee, how could you, of all people, fail to miss the fact that there are no controls, no discipline, no supervision on the media. Recall the travesty of the photos of Martin Bryant at age 50 — oops, never mind the photos of him at 29 (but there, I think, there was a clear crime: obstruction of justice).
As far as i can see the media are not “violating” any law by blocking, say, the Dutch incident that James pointed out. They are failing to live up to standards.
So what?
Correct me if I am wrong. I do see Berry’s point about ‘commodity’ in consumer law. And maybe there is something in competition law?
ABC News should lose its licence but right now there is only one voice crying in the wilderness about that and her name is Dee. And Ned too.
So go on, Dee und Ned, give us some guidance on what we can do. Whingeing just makes it worse — it tells them they have an easy ride.
Get ’em.
Here. This is from an article about Parliamentary Sex, in today’s ABC print news:
“We never publicly noted that the death of Harold Holt had been misadventure in all likelihood prompted by the PM’s desire to put on a good show for his lover on the shore.”
That is serious stuff. Treasonous misinformation, if Holt was in fact assassinated?
Get’ em.
BROADCASTING SERVICES ACT 1992
7 Conditions of commercial television broadcasting licences
(1) Each commercial television broadcasting licence is subject to the following conditions:
(h) the licensee will not use broadcasting services in the commission of an offence against another Act or a law of a State or Territory;
7D Condition about the provision of local news services
(a) committing an offence; or
Can one prove an offense has been committed…
Mais oui.
Now you’ve gone and inspired me, Dee. I typed “Richard Deslauriers, traitor” into google — He is the Marathon FBI liar — and here is what came up. I have not altered it at all:
Images for richard deslauriers, traitor
More images for richard deslauriers, traitor
Oops, no photos appear in this Comments block but they are abundant on the relevant google page. Trust me.
I just googled for “Richard Deslauriers, traitor” and got results, however they are photos and this Comment Block could not print it.
But see for yourself….
(He is the Boston Marathon FBI liar.)
Harold Holt WAS assassinated. There is a witness whose testimony the court in Queensland refuse to hear. They also refuse to accept this witnesses affidavits.
Is it lawful for a court to refuse to accept evidence of murder? In my opinion, no. But I am not a Free Mason.
Mal, tell us more about that witness, s’il vous plait.
Halbe Zijlstra is jumping the railing.
He wouldn’t be able to do that in Canberra. he’d have 2.4 metres to leap. The poor politicians have encased themselves behind wire, fences, glass and the press.
I’m opening a new account with Mattress Bank.
They’re really solid and comfy.